ill 


INTRODUCTION  TO 
POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


BY 

RAYMOND  GARFIELD  GETTELL,  M.A. 

PROFESSOR   OF   POLITICAL   SCIENCE    IN   AMHERST   COLLEGE 


REVISED  EDITION 


GINN  AND  COMPANY 

BO         N    •    NEW   YORK    •    CHICAGO    •    LONDON 
ATLA  DALLAS    •    COLUMBUS    .    SAN   FRANCISCO 


ENTERED  AT  STATIONERS'  HALL 


COPYRIGHT,  igio,  1922,  BY 
RAYMOND  GARFIELD  GETTELL, 


ALL   RIGHTS   RESERVED 


822  10 


gfie   fltftcngum 

GINN  AND  COMPANY'  PRO- 
PRIETORS •  BOSTON  •  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 


At  the  present  time  no  field  of  knowledge  is  growing  more 
rapidly  into  favor,  both  in  the  colleges  and  universities,  and  among 
thinking  people  in  general,  than  that  of  the  social  sciences.  Look- 
ing to  the  past,  they  are  linked  with  the  whole  process  of  biologic 
and  psychologic  evolution,  and  trace  the  origin  and  development 
of  human  institutions  and  ideas.  Dealing  with  the  present,  they 
describe  the  organization  and  activities  of  those  social  groups  in 
which  we  all  live.  Looking  to  the  future,  they  open  up  the 
important  political,  economic,  and  social  problems  that  future 
generations  must  solve. 

Within  this  general  field  probably  no  subdivision  so  happily 
combines  material  of  academic  interest  to,  the  student  and  pos- 
sibilities of  practical  application,  as  does  political  science.  The 
state  is  the  greatest  institution  that  man  has  created,  and  its  scope 
of  activities  promises  to  be  increasingly  extensive  as  society  be- 
comes more  complex.  It  seems,  therefore,  that  there  is  need  for 
a  book  that  will  give  a  general  outline  of  political  science,  viewing 
the  state  from  the  standpoint  of  past  development  and  present 
conditions.  For  the  special  student  in  this  department  of  knowl- 
edge it  will  serve  as  a  background  for  more  specialized  work  in 
its  various  divisions  ;  for  the  general  reader  it  will  open  up  the 
important  questions  with  which,  in  modern  democracies,  all  good 
citizens  should  be  familiar.  There  is  an  especial  need  for  a  text- 
book in  political  science  for  college  and  university  classes,  and  in 
the  arrangement  and  treatment  of  material  in  this  volume  that 
end  has  been  constantly  kept  in  mind.  The  references  at  the 
head  of  each  chapter  will  suggest  wider  reading  and  open  up  the 
general  literature  of  the  subject. 

This  volume  aims  to  add  little  to  the  sum  total  of  human  knowl- 
j  edge.  It  draws  freely  upon  the  work  of  such  scholars  as  Burgess, 


I  1 


iv  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Lowell,  Wilson,  Willoughby,  Goodnow,  Dunning,  Reinsch,  and 
many  others  in  this  country,  to  say  nothing  of  the  numerous  Eng- 
lish and  continental  writers  whose  work  in  this  field  is  excellent. 
Valuable  suggestions  have  also  been  received  from  Leacock's  "  Ele- 
ments of  Political  Science  "  and  from  Dealey's  "  The  Development 
of  the  State,"  both  of  which  appeared  while  this  work  was  in 
preparation.  The  chief  purpose  of  this  book  is  to  combine,  in 
brief  compass,  the  essentials  of  political  science,  the  details  of 
which  have  been  so  ably  worked  out  by  these  men ;  and,  by  show- 
ing the  interrelations  among  the  various  divisions  of  the  subject, 
to  bring  out  more  clearly  the  essential  unity  of  the  state.  While 
based  upon  a  certain  theory  of  the  state,  it  aims  to  give  a  fair 
statement  of  those  principles  concerning  which  scholars  are  not 
yet  entirely  in  agreement.  In  a  word,  it  is,  as  its  title  indicates, 
an  Introduction  to  Political  Science,  outlining  and  suggesting  the 
origin,  development,  organization,  and  activities  of  the  state. 

The  author  wishes  to  express  his  appreciation  of  the  assistance 
he  has  received  from  Mr.  W.  N.  Carlton,  formerly  librarian  of 
Trinity  College,  at  present  librarian  of  the  Newberry  Reference 
Library  of  Chicago  ;  of  the  helpful  criticism  of  his  former  teacher, 
Dr.  J.  Lynn  Barnard,  now  of  the  School  of  Pedagogy  of  Philadel- 
phia ;  of  the  inspiration  given  by  his  former  teacher,  Dr.  Leo  S. 
Rowe,  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  ;  and  especially  of  the 
unwearied  cooperation  of  his  wife,  whose  careful  and  critical  prep- 
aration of  the  manuscript  has  made  improvements  upon  almost 
every  page.  Valuable  assistance  in  the  verification  of  references 
and  in  the  preparation  of  the  Index  has  been  given  by  Mr.  J.  E. 
Brown,  one  of  the  author's  students  in  Trinity  College. 

RAYMOND  GARFIELD  GETTELL 

TRINITY  COLLEGE 
HARTFORD,  CONNECTICUT 


CONTENTS 


GENERAL  REFERENCES 

PAGE 

I.    SELECT  BOOKS xi 

II.    PERIODICALS xix 

INTRODUCTION 

CHAPTER 

I.    NATURE  AND  SCOPE  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 3 

References 3 

1.  Political  science 3 

2.  Relation  to  allied  sciences 4 

PART  I 
THE  NATURE  OF  THE  STATE 

II.    PRELIMINARY  DEFINITIONS  AND  DISTINCTIONS 9 

References 9 

3.  Need  for  definitions  and  distinctions 9 

4.  Nation ;  nationality 9 

5.  State 10 

6.  Sovereignty .  12 

7.  Government 13 

8.  Divisions  of  political  science 14 

III.    PHYSICAL  BASIS  OF  THE  STATE 17 

References 17 

J/  9.  Importance  of  the  physical  basis 17 

vyio.  Elements  of  the  physical  environment 18 

A  i .  Contour  of  the  earth's  surface        19 

*A2.  Climate 22 

v/13.  Resources 23 

v  14.  General  aspects  of  nature 25 

/    15.  Changes  in  environment 25 

v 


vi  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

"  IV.  POPULATION  OF  THE  STATE   ............  29 

References  .................  29 

1  6.  Importance  of  population    ............  29 

1  7.  Growth  of  population      .............  30 

1  8.   Distribution  of  population   ............  31 

19.  Race  ...................  33 

20.  Nationality  .................  33 

Political  genius  of  various  nations      .........  35 

Importance  of  the  individual    ........     ...  37 


V.  ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE  ..............  41 

uX$r       References   .................  41 

24.  Forces  in  state-building  .............  '41 

AK25.V  Kinship   ..................  42 

\7     26:  Religion  ..................  44 

27.  Need  for  order  and  protection  .          .........  46 

28.  Emergence  of  the  state  r*?bU**X4**    >X^j^    ....  47 

29.  Stagnation  and  progress      ............  49 


_M-Krv»*  **\i'<r^f 

VI.  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE 53 

References 53 

30  .^Evolution  of  the  state 53 

31*  The  Oriental  empire 54 

32.* The  Greek  city  state 55 

33.* The  Roman  world  empire 57 

34.yThe  feudal  state 59 

35?  The  national  state 61 

36.*  General  features  of  state  development 65 


VII.  THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE 71 

References 71 

37.  Importance  of  political  theories 71 

38.  Ancient  political  theories* 73 

39.  Medieval  political  theory 76 

40.  Modern  political  theory 77 

41.  The  divine  theory 80 

42.  The  social-contract  theory 81 

43.  The  organic  theory 87 

44.  Present  political  theory 89 


CONTENTS  vii 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

VIII.  SOVEREIGNTY  .............     ....  93 

References       .............     ...  93 

—  -     45.  Nature  of  sovereignty   .............  93 

_    46.   Development  of  theory  of  sovereignty  ........  95 

47.  Criticism  of  theory  of  sovereignty    .........  97 

48.  Location  of  sovereignty      ............  98 

49.  Popular  sovereignty  ..............  99 

50.  Sovereignty  as  constitution-making  power      ......  101 

51.  Sovereignty  as  lawmaking  power      .     .     .     .     .....  103 

52.  Revolution       .     >    ..............  104 

IX.  INDIVIDUAL  LIBERTY    ..............  109 

References       ................  109 

"N/   53.  Relation  of  state  to  individual      ..........  109 

54.  Nature  of  civil  liberty    .............  1  1  o 

^  55.  Guarantee  of  civil  liberty   ............  112 

56.  Content  of  civil  liberty  .     .     .  »,  ..........  114 

5  7.  Political  liberty     ...........     ....115 

•  "9 

eferences       ................  119 

58.  Nature  of  law  ................  119 

"Nf  59.  /Sources  of  law     ...............  121 

>  60  V  Basis  of  modern  law      .............  123 

61.  Rights    ......     ............  126 

62.  Divisions  of  law  ...............  1  28 

63Y  Law  and  ethics     .-    ..............  130 


XI.  RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  STATE     .....     .....  133 

References      ....     .          .    i^^u^  .....  T33 

64.  International  relations  .  V^^V^^Td/^     ......  133 

65.  History  of  international  relations      .........  1  34 

\  66.%  Sources  of  international  law    .    **r+**JsPr?    ......  13? 

67.  Parties  to  international  law    T  jW^.^Ji     ......  139 

68  .fvNature  of  international  law     ...........  I41 


XI  I  ./CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW     ........     .145 

References      ................     145 

69.  Divisions  of  international  law      ..........      145 

70.  Independence  and  equality     .........     .     .      146 


viii  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


71.  Property     ..........     .......  14$ 

72.  Jurisdiction      ................  151 

73.  Diplomacy.     .     .     ..............  152 

74-  War.    /  ..........    .......  IS6 

75.  Neutrality's     ........     .     .......  160 

76.  Neutral  commerce     ............  162 


"*  XIII.  FORM  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF  GOVERNMENT 167 

yL  References 167 

7.  Forms  of  the  state  *.     .    _.__*— •-*•  -  -.- •^•^T 167 

78.  Forms  of  government* 170 

9.   Unitary  and  dual  governments 172 

80.  Parliamentary  and  nonparliamentary  governments  ....  173 

81.  Application  to  modern  states 175 


XIV.  FEDEJIAL  GOVERNMENT     .............  179 

References       ................  179 

"82.  Forms  of  union    .......     ........  179 

83.  Nature  of  federal  government      ..........  181 

\  84.   Distribution  of  powers  .............  1  84 

85.  Advantages  and  disadvantages  of  federal  government  .     .     .  186 

XV.  CONSTITUTIONS      ................  191 

References       ................  191 

Nature  of  constitutions  .............  191 

Requisites  of  constitutions  ............  193 

Creation  of  constitutions     .     .  '   ..........  195 

Amendment  of  constitutions  .  4        A/W/O^  ......  198 


PART   II 

THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  GOVERNMENT 

V 

XVI.  THE  ELECTORATE .     .  205 

References 205 

got  Requisites  of  a  democracy 2^5' 

91*  Extent  of  the  electorate 206 

92^  Control  of  electorate  over  government 211 

93.   Initiative  and  referendum 213 

94  .^Minority  representation 216 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER^ 

XVII.  SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS 


IX 

PAGE 
221 


References       ...............  221 

The  ordinary  government  ...........  221 

heorv  of  tl.e  sej^ration  of  powers  ........  223 

Separation  of  powers  in  modern  states       ......  224 

Criticism  of  separation  of  powers     ........  227 

Division  of  powers   .............  230 

HE  LEGISLATURE      .............     .     .  237 

References       ...............  237 

100.  Structure  of  legislatures      ...........  237 

101.  Composition  of  upper  houses  ..........  240 

1  02.  Composition  of  lower  houses  .....     .....  242 

103.  Comparative  power  of  the  two  houses  .......  244 

104.  Internal  organization     ..."    .........  246 

105.  Method  of  procedure     ......    .......  249 

1  06.  Functions  of  legislatures    ...........  252 

XIX.  THE  EXECUTIVE     ..............     .255 

References       ...............  255 

107.  Evolution  of  the  executive      ..........  255 

1  08.  The  executive  head  .............  257 

109.  Executive  councils    .............  261 

110.  Heads  of  departments   ............  263 

111.  The  civil  service  ..............  267 

1  1  2.  Functions  of  the  executive  ...........  269 

XX.  THE  JUDICIARY      .     .     .............  273 

References       ...............  273 

113.  Evolution  of  the  judicial  department     .......  273 

114.  Functions  and  requisites  of  the  judiciary    ......  275 

115.  Relation  of  judiciary  to  executive     ........  277 

1  1  6.  Relation  of  judiciary  to  legislature    ........  280 

117.  Organization  of  the  judiciary  ..........  283 


XXI. 


POLITICAL  PARTIES    .*        .       ^^^  **  ....  289 

References       ...     ............  289 

1  1  8.   Functions  of  political  parties  ..........  289 

1  1  ojHHistory  of  political  parties  .......     ....  292 

120.   Present  political  parties       ...........  297 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

PAGE 

121.  Party  organization 305 

122.  Party  reform 308 

XXII.  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 315 

References 315 

123.  Relation  of  local  to  central  government 315 

124.  Commonwealth  governments 318 

125.  Rural  local  government 321 

126.  Historical  development  of  cities 329 

127.  Municipal  government 333 

128.  Municipal  reform  in  the  United  States 338 

129.  Municipal  activities 340 

XXIII.  COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT 347 

References 347 

130.  Importance  of  colonial  development 347 

131.  Historical  development  of  colonies 350 

132.  Motives  of  colonization 355 

133.  Development  of  colonial  policy 359 

134.  Colonial  policy  of  England 363 

135.  Colonial  policy  of  the  United  States 366 

136.  Forms  of  colonial  government 371 

PART   III 
THE  ENDS   OF  THE   STATE 

/'XXIV.  THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT 377 

References 377 


^137-  The  aims  of  the  state 377 

138.  The  activities  of  the  state 379 

39.  Individualism 3^r 

140.  Socialism 3^5 

£41.  Socialism  in  present  politics 387 

XXV.  THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT 393 

References 393 

142.  Classification  of  governmental  functions 393 

143.  Essential  functions 39^ 

144.  Optional  functions 4O1 


GENERAL   REFERENCES 


I.  SELECT   BOOKS 

The  following  list  contains  the  books  referred  to  in  this  volume,  and,  while 
by  no  means  exhaustive,  forms  a  working  library  in  political  science.  With  a 
few  exceptions  it  is  limited  to  books  written  in  English  or  translated  into 
English.  Specific  references  will  be  found  at  the  beginning  of  each  chapter. 

ADAMS,  B.    The  New  Empire.    New  York,  1902. 

ADAMS,  G.  B.    Civilization  during  the  Middle  Ages.    New  York,  1 894. 

AMES,  H.  V.    The  Proposed  Amendments  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United 

States  during  the  First  Century  of  its  History.   Annual  Report  of  the 

American  Historical  Association,  Vol.  II,  1896. 
AMOS,  S.    The  Science  of  Law.    New  York,  1888. 
AMOS,  S.    The  Science  of  Politics.    New  York,  1883. 
ARISTOTLE.    The  Politics.    For  translation,  see  Jowett. 
AUGUSTINE,  BISHOP  OF  HIPPO.    De  Civitate  Dei.   Libri  22.   Lipsiae,  Teubner, 

1877. 

AUSTIN,  J.    Lectures  on  Jurisprudence.    2  vols.    London,  4th  ed.,  1879. 
BAGEHOT,  W.    Physics  and  Politics.    New  York,  1873. 
BAGEHOT,  W.    The  English  Constitution.    London,  1867. 
BALDWIN,  S.  E.    The  American  Judiciary.    New  York,  1905. 
BASTABLE,  C.  F.    Public  Finance.    New  York,  2d  ed.,  1895. 
BEARD,  C.  A.    American  Government  and  Politics.    New  York,  1910. 
BEARD,  C.  A.    Readings  in  American  Government  and  Politics.    New  York, 

1909. 

BEMIS,  E.  W.    Municipal  Monopolies.    New  York,  4th  ed.,  1904. 
BENTHAM,  J.    Fragment  on  Government.    Oxford,  1776. 
BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.    The  Theory  of  the  State.    Oxford,  translation  of  6th  ed., 

1885. 
BODIN,  JEAN.    Six   Books    concerning   the    State.    Translated   by  Richard 

Knolles.    London,  1606. 

BODLEY,  J.  E.  C.    France.    2  vols.    New  York,  1898. 
BONDY,  W.    The  Separation  of  Governmental  Powers.     Columbia  College  v 

Studies,  Vol.  V,  No.  2. 
BORGEAUD,  CH.    Adoption  and  Amendment  of  Constitutions  in  Europe  and 

America.    Translated  by  C.  D.  Hazen  and  J.  M.  Vincent.    New  York, 

1891. 


xii  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

BOSANQUET,  B.    The  Philosophical  Theory  of  the  State.    New  York,  1809. 

BOTSFORD,  G.  W.  Development  of  the  Athenian  Constitution.  Cornell  Uni- 
versity Studies  in  Classical  Philology.  New  York,  1893. 

BOUTMY,  E.  Studies  in  Constitutional  Law.  Translated  by  E.  M.  Dicey. 
London,  1891. 

BRINTON,  D.  G.    Races  and  Peoples.    Philadelphia,  1890. 

BRYCE,  J.  The  American  Commonwealth.  2  vols.  London  and  New  York, 
1889. 

BRYCE,  J.    The  Holy  Roman  Empire.    New  York,  8th  ed.,  1883. 

BRYCE,  J.    Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence.    Oxford,  1901. 

BUCKLE,  H.  T.    History  of  Civilization  in  England.    3  vols.    London,  1872. 

BURGESS,  J.W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law.  2  vols.  Boston, 
1890. 

BURNETT,  E.  C.  The  Government  of  Federal  Territories  in  Europe.  Annual 
Reports  of  the  American  Historical  Association,  Vol.  VIII,  Part  I. 

CALDECOTT,  A.    English  Colonization  and  Empire.    New  York,  1903. 

CALVIN,  JOHN.  Institutes  of  the  Christian  Religion.  Translated  by  H.  Bever- 
idge.  Edinburgh,  1847. 

CARSON,  H.  L.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States:  Its  History. 
2  vols.  Philadelphia,  1892. 

CICERO.    The  Republic.    For  translation,  see  Featherstonhaugh. 

CLARKE,  R.  F.    The  Science  of  Law  and  Lawmaking.    New  York,  1898. 

CLEVELAND,  F.  A.  The  Growth  of  Democracy  in  the  United  States.  Chicago, 
1898. 

COLONIAL  ADMINISTRATION.  Bureau  of  Statistics,  Treasury  Department, 
Washington,  1901. 

COMMONS,  J.  R.    Proportional  Representation.    New  York,  1896. 

COOLEY,  T.  M.    Constitutional  Limitations.    Boston,  6th  ed.,  1890. 

COOLIDGE,  A.  C.    The  United  States  as  a  World  Power.    New  York,  1908. 

COUBERTIN,  P.  The  Evolution  of  France  under  the  Third  Republic.  Trans- 
lated by  I.  F.  Hapgood.  New  York,  1897. 

CRANE,  R.  T.  The  State  in  Constitutional  and  International  Law.  Johns 
Hopkins  University  Studies,  Series  XXV,  Nos.  6-7.  Baltimore,  1907. 

CUNNINGHAM,  W.  An  Essay  on  Western  Civilization  in  its  Economic  As- 
pects. 2  vols.  (Ancient  Times ;  Medieval  and  Modern  Times).  London, 
1898-1900. 

CYCLOP/EDI  A  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE.  Edited  by  J.  J.  Lalor.  3  vols.  Chicago, 
1882-1884. 

DALLINGER,  F.  W.  Nominations  for  Elective  Office  in  the  United  States. 
New  York,  1897. 

DANTE  ALIGHIERI.  De  Monarchia.  Translated  by  F.  J.  Church.  London, 
1879. 

DAVIES,  J.  L.,  and  VAUGHAN,  D.  J.  The  Republic  of  Plato.  Translated,  with 
Analysis  and  Notes.  London,  1897. 


GENERAL  REFERENCES  xiii 

DAVIS,  G.  B.    The  Elements  of  International  Law.    New  York,  3d  ed.,  1908. 

DAY,  CLIVE.   A  History  of  Commerce.    New  York,  1907. 

DAY,  CLIVE.   The  Dutch  in  Java.    New  York,  1904. 

DE  COULANGES,  FUSTEL.  The  Ancient  City.  Translated  by  W.  A.  Small. 
Boston,  loth  ed.,  1901. 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.    The  Development  of  the  State.    New  York,  1909. 

DEPLOIGE,  S.  The  Referendum  in  Switzerland.  Translated  by  C.  P.  Tre- 
velyan.  New  York,  1898. 

DICEY,  A.  V.  Lectures  Introductory  to  the  Study  of  the  Law  of  the  Consti- 
tution. London  and  New  York,  5th  ed.,  1897. 

DODD,  W.  F.    Modern  Constitutions.    2  vols.    Chicago,  1909. 

DUNNING,  W.  A.  A  History  of  Political  Theories.  2  vols.  New  York,  1902- 
1905. 

EATON,  D.  B.    The  Government  of  Municipalities.    New  York,  1899. 

EGERTON,  H.  E.    Origin  and  Growth  of  English  Colonies.    Oxford,  1903. 

ELY,  R.  T.    French  and  German  Socialism.    New  York,  1883. 

ELY,  R.  T.    Monopolies  and  Trusts.    New  York,  1900. 

ELY,  R.  T.    Socialism  and  Social  Reform.    New  York,  1 894. 

FAIRBANKS,  A.    Introduction  to  Sociology.    New  York,  3d  ed.,  1905. 

FAIRLIE,  J.  A.  Local  Government  in  the  United  States,  Cities  Excepted. 
New  York,  1904. 

FAIRLIE,  J.  A.    Municipal  Administration.    New  York,  1901. 

FARRAND,  L.  Basis  of  American  History.  American  Nation,  Vol.  II.  New 
York,  1904. 

FEATHERSTONHAUGH,  G.  W.  The  Republic  of  Cicero.  Translated,  with  Intro- 
duction. New  York,  1829. 

FEDERALIST,  THE.    Edited  by  Lodge,  1888. 

FIGGIS,  J.  N.  The  Theory  of  the  Divine  Right  of  Kings.  Cambridge  (Eng.), 
1896. 

FILMER,  SIR  ROBERT.  Patriarcha.  In  the  volume  with  Locke's  Two  Treatises 
of  Civil  Government,  ed.  by  Henry  Morley.  London,  2d  ed.,  1887. 

FOLIJETT,  M.  P.  The  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives.  New  York, 
i  1896. 

Fopo,  H.  J.    Rise  and  Growth  of  American  Politics.    New  York,  1898. 

FOSTER,  J.  W.    Arbitration  and  the  Hague  Court.    Boston,  1904. 

FOSTER,  J.  W.    A  Century  of  American  Diplomacy.    Boston,  1900. 

FOSTER,  J.  W.    The  Practice  of  Diplomacy.    Boston,  1906. 

FOWLER,  W.W.    The  City  State  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans.    London,  1893. 

FREEMAN,  E.  A.    Comparative  Politics.    New  York,  1874. 

FREEMAN,  E.  A.    History  of  Federal  Government.   London,  1863. 

FREUND,  E.  Empire  and  Sovereignty.  Chicago  University  Decennial  Publi- 
cations, Vol.  IV,  1903. 

FREUND,  E.   The  Police  Power.    Chicago,  1904. 

GARNER,  J.  W.    Introduction  to  Political  Science.    New  York,  1910. 


xiv          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

GIDDINGS,  F.  H.    Democracy  and  Empire.    New  York,  1900. 

GIDDINGS,  F.  H.    The  Principles  of  Sociology.    New  York,  1896. 

GIERKE,  O.     Political  Theories  of  the  Middle  Ages.    Translated  by  F.  W. 

Maitland.    Cambridge  (Eng.),  1900. 

GODKIN,  E.  L.    Problems  of  Modern  Democracy.    New  York,  1897. 
GOODNOW,  F.  J.    City  Government  in  the  United  States.    New  York,  1904. 
GOODNOW,  F.  J.    Comparative  Administrative  Law.    2  vols.    New  York,  1893. 
GOODNOW,  F.  J.    Municipal  Government.    New  York,  1909. 
GOODNOW,  F.  J.    Municipal  Problems.    New  York,  1897. 
GOODNOW,  F.  J.    Politics  and  Administration.    New  York,  1900. 
GRAHAM,  W.    English  Political  Philosophy  from  Hobbes  to  Maine.    London, 

1899. 
GREEN,  T.  H.    Lectures  on  the  Principles  of  Political  Obligation.    New  York, 

1895. 
GROTIUS,  HUGO.     The  Law  of  War  and  Peace.     Abridged  translation  by 

William  Whewell.    3  vols.    Cambridge  (Eng.),  1853. 
HALL,  W.  E.    International  Law.    Oxford,  5th  ed.,  1904. 
HART,  A.  B.    Actual  Government.    New  York,  2d  ed.,  1905. 
HART,  A.  B.    Foundations  of  American  Foreign  Policy.    New  York,  1901. 
HART,  A.  B.    Practical  Essays  on  American  Government.    New  York,  1893. 
HEARN,W.  E.    The  Aryan  Household.    London,  1879. 
HENDERSON,  C.  R.    Dependents,  Defectives,  Delinquents.    Boston,  1901. 
HENDERSON,  J.  B.    American  Diplomatic  Questions.    New  York,  1901. 
HILL,  D.  J.     History  of   Diplomacy  in  the   International  Development  of 

Europe.   Vols.  I,  II.    New  York,  1905-1906. 
HILL,  M.    Liberty  Documents.    New  York,  1901. 

HILLQUIT,  M.    History  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States.    New  York,  1903. 
HILLQUIT,  M.    Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice.    New  York,  1909. 
HINSDALE,  B.  A.     How  to  Study  and  Teach  History.     New  York,  rev.  ed., 

1907. 

HOBBES,  THOMAS.    Leviathan.    Edited  by  Henry  Morley.    London,  1887. 
HOBSON,  J.    The  Evolution  of  Modern  Capitalism.    London,  1894. 
HOLLAND,  T.  E.    The  Elements  of  Jurisprudence.    Oxford,  roth  ed.,  1906. 
HOOKER,  RICHARD.   The  Laws  of  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  Books  I-IV.    Edited 

by  Henry  Morley.    London,  1888. 
HOPKINS,  J.  H.    History  of  Political  Parties  in  the  United  States.    New  York, 

1900. 

IRELAND,  A.   Tropical  Colonization.    New  York,  1899. 
JENKS,  E.    An  Outline  of  English  Local  Government.    London,  1894. 
JENKS,  E.    History  of  Politics.    New  York,  1900. 
JENKS,  E.    Law  and  Politics  in  the  Middle  Ages.    New  York,  1898. 
JEPHSON,  H.    The  Platform  :  Its  Rise  and  Progress.    2  vols.    New  York,  1892. 
JOHNSON,  E.  R.    American  Railway  Transportation.    New  York,  1905. 
JOHNSON,  E.  R.    Ocean  and  Inland  Water  Transportation.    New  York,  1906. 


GENERAL  REFERENCES  xv 

JORDAN,  D.  S.    Imperial  Democracy.    New  York,  1899. 

JOWETT,  REV.  B.    The  Politics  of  Aristotle.    Translated,  with  Introduction, 

Analysis,  and  Notes.    2  vols.    Oxford,  1885. 
JUDSON,  H.  P.    The  Essential  Elements  of  a  Written  Constitution.    Chicago 

University  Decennial  Publications,  Vol.  IV,  1903. 

KELLY,  E.    Government,  or  Human  Evolution.    2  vols.    New  York,  1901. 
KIRKUP,  T.    History  of  Socialism.    London,  1892. 

LAWRENCE,  T.  J.    The  Principles  of  International  Law.    Boston,  3d  ed.,  1906. 
LEACOCK,  S.    Elements  of  Political  Science.    Boston,  1906. 
LECKY,  W.  E.  H.    Democracy  and  Liberty.    2  vols.    New  York,  1896. 
LEE,  G.  C.    Historical  Jurisprudence.    New  York,  1900. 
LEROY-BEAULIEU,  P.   The  Modern  State.    New  York,  1891. 
LETOURNEAU,  CH.    Property:  Its  Origin  and  Development.    New  York,  1892. 
LEWIS,  G.  C.    Government  of  Dependencies.    Oxford,  Lucas  ed.,  1891. 
LEWIS,  G.  C.    The  Use  and  Abuse  of  Political  Terms.    London,  1832. 
LIEBER,  F.    Civil  Liberty  and  Self-Government.    2  vols.    Philadelphia,  1853. 
LILLY,  W.  S.    First  Principles  in  Politics.    New  York,  1899. 
LLOYD,  H.  D.    Newest  England.    New  York,  1900. 
LOCKE,  JOHN.     Two  Treatises  of  Government.     Edited  by  Henry  Morley. 

London,  2d  ed.,  1887. 

LOWELL,  A.  L.    Essays  on  Government.    Boston,  1889. 
LOWELL,  A.  L.     Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe.     2  vols. 

Boston,  1896. 

LOWELL,  A.  L.    The  Government  of  England.    2  vols.    New  York,  1908. 
McCLAiN,  E.    Cases  on  Constitutional  Law.    Boston,  1900. 
McCLAiN,  E.    Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States.    New  York,  1905. 
McCoNACHiE,  L.  G.    Congressional  Committees.    New  York,  1898. 
M'KECHNIE,  W.  S.    The  State  and  the  Individual.    New  York,  1896. 
McKENZiE,  J.  S.     Introduction  to  Social  Philosophy.     New  York,  2d  ed., 

1895. 

MCLENNAN,  J.  F.    The  Patriarchal  Theory.    London,  1885. 
MACHIAVELLI,  NICCOLO.  The  Prince.  In  Morley's  Universal  Library.  London, 

1889. 

MACY,  J.    Party  Organization  and  Machinery.    New  York,  1904. 
MACY,  J.    The  English  Constitution.    New  York,  1900. 
MAHAN,  A.  T.    Sea  Power  and  its  Relations  to  the  War  of  1812.    2  vols. 

Boston,  1905. 

MAHAN,  A.  T.   The  Influence  of  Sea  Power  upon  History.    London,  1890. 
MAINE,  SIR  H.  S.   Ancient  Law.    New  York,  1885. 
MAINE,  SIR  H.  S.    Early  Law  and  Custom.    New  York,  1883. 
MAINE,  SIR  H.  S.    Lectures  on  the  Early  History  of  Institutions.    New  York, 

1875. 

MARKBY,  SIR  W.    Elements  of  Law.    Oxford,  1889. 
MARSHALL.  A.    Principles  of  Economics.    London,  4th  ed.,  1898. 


xvi  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

MASON,  E.  C.    The  Veto  Power :  Its  Origin,  Development,  and  Function  in 

the  Government  of  the  United  States,  1789-1889.    Boston,  1890. 
MAY,  T.  E.    Constitutional  History  of  England.    2  vols.    Boston,  1864. 
MAYO-SMITH,  R.    Statistics  and  Sociology.    New  York,  1895. 
MEDLEY,  D.  J.    English  Constitutional  History.    Oxford,  3d  ed.,  1902. 
MERRIAM,  C.  E.   A  History  of  American  Political  Theories.    New  York,  1903. 
MERRIAM,  C.  E.     History  of  the  Theory  of  Sovereignty  since  Rousseau. 

Columbia  University  Studies,  Vol.  XII,  No.  4.    New  York,  1900. 
MILL,  J.  S.    On  Liberty.    London,  3d  ed.,  1864. 
MILL,  J.  S.    Principles  of  Political  Economy,  with  Some  of  their  Applications 

to  Social  Philosophy.    2  vols.    London,  5th  ed.,  1880. 
MONTESQUIEU,  C.    Spirit  of  the  Laws.    Nugent's  translation.     New  edition, 

revised  by  J.  V.  Prichard.    2  vols.    London,  1878  (Bohn's  Library). 
MOORE,  J.  B.    A  History  and  Digest  of  International  Arbitrations.    6  vols. 

Washington,  1898. 

MOORE,  J.  B.    International  Law  Digest.    8  vols.  Washington,  1906. 
MOREY,  W.  C.    Outlines  of  Roman  Law.    New  York,  1884. 
MORGAN,  L.  H.    Ancient  Society.    New  York,  1877. 
MORRIS,  H.  C.    The  History  of  Colonization.    2  vols.    New  York,  1900. 
MUXRO,  W.  B.    The  Government  of  European  Cities.    New  York,  1909. 
OBERHOLTZER,  E.  P.    The  Referendum  in  America.    New  York,  1900. 
OSGOOD,  H.  L.  The  Political  Ideas  of  the  Puritans.   Political  Science  Quarterly, 

Vol.  VI,  1891. 
OSTROGORSKI,  M.     Democracy  and   the  Organization  of  Political   Parties. 

Translated  by  F.  Clarke.    2  vols.    New  York,  1902. 
PATTEN,  S.  N.    The  New  Basis  of  Civilization.    New  York,  1907. 
PLATO.    The  Republic.    For  translation,  see  Davies. 
POLLOCK,  SIR  F.    An  Introduction  to  the  History  of  the  Science  of  Politics. 

London,  1897. 

POLLOCK,  SIR  F.    Essays  in  Jurisprudence  and  Ethics.    New  York,  1882. 
PORRITT,  E.    The  Unreformed  House  of  Commons.     2  vols.     Cambridge 

(Eng.),  1903. 

PULSZKY,  A.    The  Theory  of  Law  and  Civil  Society.    London,  1888. 
RAE,  J.    Contemporary  Socialism.    London,  2d  ed.,  1891. 
REID,  W.    Problems  of  Expansion.    New  York,  1900. 
REINSCH,  P.  S.    American  Legislatures  and  Legislative  Methods.    New  York, 

1904. 

REINSCH,  P.  S.    Colonial  Administration.    New  York,  1905. 
REINSCH,  P.  S.    Colonial  Government.    New  York,  1905. 
REINSCH,  P.  S.    Readings  on  American  Federal  Government.    Boston,  1909. 
REINSCH,  P.  S.   World  Politics.    New  York,  1904. 
RIPLEY,  W.  Z.    The  Races  of  Europe.    2  vols.    New  York,  1899. 
RITCHIE,  D.  G.    Natural  Rights.    New  York,  2d  ed.,  1903. 
RITCHIE,  D.  G.    Principles  of  State  Interference.    New  York,  3d  ed.,  1902. 


GENERAL  REFERENCES  xvii 

RITCHIE,  D.  G.    Studies  in  Political  and  Social  Ethics.    New  York,  1902. 
ROBERTSON,  E.    Article  "  Law  "  in  Encyclopedia  Britannica.    9th  ed. 
ROBINSON,  J.  H.,  and  BEARD,  C.  A.    The  Development  of  Modern  Europe. 

2  vols.    Boston,  1908. 

Ross,  E.  A.    The  Foundations  of  Sociology.    New  York,  1905. 
ROUSSEAU,  JEAN  JACQUES.   The  Social  Contract.    Translated  by  H.  J.  Tozer. 

New  York,  4th  ed.,  1906. 
SCHAFFLE,  A.  E.  F.    Bau  und  Leben  des  socialen  Korpers.    4  Bde.   Tubingen, 

1875-1878  and  1881. 

SCHAFFLE,  A.  E.  F.   The  Quintessence  of  Socialism.   Translation  of  8th  Ger- 
man edition.    New  York,  1 889. 

SCHERGER,  G.  L.    The  Evolution  of  Modern  Liberty.    New  York,  1904. 
SCHOULER,  J.    Constitutional  Studies.    New  York,  1897. 
SCOTT,  J.  B.    Cases  on  International  Law.    Boston,  1902. 
SEELEY,  SIR  J.  R.    Introduction  to  Political  Science.    London,  1896. 
SEELEY,  SIR  J.  R.   The  Expansion  of  England.    London,  2d  ed.,  1895. 
SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.    Essays  in  Taxation.    New  York,  5th  ed.,  1905. 
SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.    Principles  of  Economics.    New  York   1905. 
SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.    The  Economic  Interpretation  of  History.     New  York, 

1902. 
SEMPLE,  E.  C.    American  History  and  its  Geographic  Conditions.    Boston, 

1903. 
SHAW,  A.    Municipal     Government     in    Continental    Europe.     New  York, 

1895. 

SHAW,  A.    Municipal  Government  in  Great  Britain.    New  York,  1895. 
SIDGWICK,  H.    Elements  of  Politics.    New  York,  2d  ed.,  1897. 
SIDGWICK,  H.    The  Development  of  European  Polity.    New  York,  1903. 
SMALL,  A.  W.    General  Sociology.    Chicago,  1905. 
SMITH,  F.  E.    International  Law.    Temple  Primers. 
SMITH,  J.  A.    The  Spirit  of  American  Government.    New  York,  1907. 
SNOW,  A.  H.    The  Administration  of  Dependencies.    New  York,  1902. 
SNOW,  F.    Cases  and  Opinions  on  International  Law.    Boston,  1893. 
SPENCER,  H.    Principles  of  Sociology.    3  vols.    New  York,  3d  ed.,  1890. 
STANTON,  E.  C.,  and  others.    History  of  Woman  Suffrage.   4  vols.    Rochester, 

2d  ed.,  1889-1902. 
STEARNS,  J.  M.    Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of  England.    New 

York,  1889. 
STEVENS,  C.  E.     Sources  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.     New 

York,  1894. 
STORY,  J.    Commentaries  on  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.    2  vols. 

Boston,  5th  ed.,  1891. 
TASWELL-LANGMEAD,  L.    English  Constitutional  History.    London,  3d  ed., 

1886. 
TAYLOR,  I.    The  Origin  of  the  Aryans.    New  York,  1889. 


xviii        INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

THOMAS  AQUIXAS.    De  Regimine  Principum,Vol.  XXVII,  opusc.  16,  in  Opera 

Omnia.    Paris,  1871-1880. 

TREATIES  AND  CONVENTIONS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.   Washington,  1899. 
TROTTER,  S.    Geography  of  Commerce.    New  York,  1903. 
TUCKER,  G.  F.    The  Monroe  Doctrine.    Boston,  1885. 
VINCENT,  J.  M.    Government  in  Switzerland.    New  York,  1900. 
WALKER,  T.  A.    History  of  the  Law  of  Nations.    2  vols.    New  York,  1 899- 

1900. 

WALLACE,  A.  R.,  and  others.    Progress  of  the  Century.    New  York,  1901. 
WALPOLE,  S.    Foreign  Relations.    London,  1882. 
WALPOLE,  S.    The  Electorate  and  the  Legislature.    New  York,  1881. 
WARD,  L.  F.   Applied  Sociology.    Boston,  1906. 
WARD,  L.  F.    Pure  Sociology.    New  York,  1903. 

WEBER,  A.  F.    The  Growth  of  Cities.    Columbia  University  Studies  in  His- 
tory, Economics,  and  Public  Law,  Vol.  XI.    New  York,  1899. 
WESTERMARCK,  E.    History  of  Human  Marriage.    New  York,  1891. 
WESTLAKE,  J.    Chapters  on  the  Principles  of  International  Law.    Cambridge 

(Eng.),  1894. 

WILCOX,  D.  F.    The  Study  of  City  Government.    New  York,  1897. 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  F.    Territories  and  Dependencies  of  the  United  States. 

New  York,  1905. 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  American  Constitutional  System.   New  York,  1904. 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.   The  Nature  of  the  State.    New  York,  1 896. 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Political  Theories  of  the  Ancient  World.     New 

York,  1903. 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.   The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.    Baltimore, 

1890. 

WILSON,  W.    An  Old  Master  and  other  Political  Essays.    Boston,  1893. 
WILSON,  W.    Congressional    Government :    A    Study  in   American    Politics. 

Boston,  1885. 

WILSON,  W.    The  State.    Boston,  rev.  ed.,  1909. 
WOODBURN,  J.  A.    Political  Parties  and  Party  Problems  in  the  United  States. 

New  York,  1909. 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.    Political  Science.    2  vols.    New  York,  1877. 
WRIGHT,  C.  D.    Practical  Sociology.    New  York,  5th  ed.,  1902. 
ZENKER,  E.V.   Anarchism.    London,  1898. 
ZUEBLIN,  C.   American  Municipal  Progress.    New  York,  1902. 


GENERAL  REFERENCES  xix 

II.  PERIODICALS 

The  following  is  a  partial  list  of  periodicals,  published  in  English,  containing 
material  of  importance  in  political  science.  For  articles  in  periodic  literature 
"Poole's  Index"  is  the  standard  guide.  In  addition,  the  official  publications  of 
the  various  governments,  including  the  statutes  and  debates  of  their  legis- 
lative bodies,  the  decisions  of  their  courts  and  administrative  commissions, 
and  the  reports  of  their  various  departments,  are  indispensable.  Detailed  lists 
of  such  publications  may  be  found  in  the  "  Statesman's  Year-Book."  Finally, 
there  is  much  fugitive  material  contained  in  the  diaries,  letters,  and  state 
papers  of  public  men,  and  in  the  news  items  that  appear  from  time  to  time  in 
reliable  newspapers.  Students  of  political  science  must,  in  a  general  way,  keep 
in  touch  with  this  material. 

American  Historical  Association,  Annual  Reports  of  the.    1884-. 

American  Historical  Review.    New  York,  1895-. 

American  Journal  of  International  Law.    New  York,  1907-. 

American  Journal  of  Sociology.    Chicago,  1895-. 

American  Law  Review.    Boston  and  St.  Louis,  1866-. 

American  Political  Science  Association,  Proceedings  of  the.    1904-. 

American  Political  Science  Review.    Baltimore,  1906-. 

Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  Philadelphia, 
1890-. 

Annual  Register.    London,  1758-. 

Appleton's  Annual  Cyclopedia  and  Register  of  Important  Events.  New  York, 
1862-. 

Atlantic  Monthly.    Boston,  1857-. 

Columbia  University  Studies  in  History,  Economics,  and  Public  Law.  New 
York,  1891-. 

Edinburgh  Review.    Edinburgh,  1802-. 

Forum.      New  York,  1886-. 

Good  Government.    Boston,  Washington,  and  New  York,  1881-. 

Harvard  Law  Review.    Cambridge  (Mass.),  1888-. 

Independent.    New  York,  1848-. 

Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  Historical  and  Political  Science.  Balti- 
more, 1883-. 

Journal  of  Comparative  Legislation.    London,  1897-. 

Journal  of  Political  Economy.    Chicago,  1892-. 

Juridical  Review.    Edinburgh,  1889-. 

Law  Quarterly  Review.    London,  1885-. 

Michigan  Political  Science  Association  Publications.    Ann  Arbor,  1893-. 

Municipal  Affairs.    New  York,  1897-. 

Nation.    New  York,  1865-. 

Nineteenth  Century  and  After.    London,  1877-. 


xx  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

North  American  Review.    Boston  and  New  York,  1815-. 

Outlook.    New  York,  1867-. 

Political  Science  Quarterly.    New  York,  1886-. 

Review  of  Reviews.    New  York,  1890-. 

Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics.    Boston,  1886-. 

Statesman's  Year-Book.    London,  1864-. 

Weekly  Times.    London. 

Yale  Law  Journal.    New  Haven,  1891-. 

Yale  Review.    New  Haven,  1892-. 


INTRODUCTION   TO 
POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  I 

REFERENCES 
V--    POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

1.  HISTORICAL  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

2.  POLITICAL  THEORY 

3.  DESCRIPTIVE  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

4.  APPLIED  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

^     RELATION  TO  ALLIED  SCIENCES 

1.  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  AND  SOCIOLOGY 

2.  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  AND  HISTORY 

3.  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  AND  ECONOMICS 

4.  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  AND  ETHICS 

5.  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  AND  JURISPRUDENCE 


INTRODUCTION 

CHAPTER  I 
NATURE  AND  SCOPE  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  pp.  1-20 
BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.   The  Theory  of  the  State,  Introduction 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.   The  Work  of  the  American  Political  Science  Association.   Pro- 
ceedings of  the  American  Political  Science  Association  (1904),  Vol.  I,  pp.  35-47 
LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  3-12 
POLLOCK,  F.  History  of  the  Science  of  Politics,  pp.  1-8,  93-96 
PULSZKY,  A.  The  Theory  of  Law  and  Civil  Society,  chap,  iii 
SEELEY,  J.  R.  Introduction  to  Political  Science,  Lecture  I 
SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chap,  i 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  chap,  i 

1.  Political  science.  In  order  to  convey  a  comprehensive  idea 
of  the  nature  and  scope  of  political  science,  it  is  necessary  to 
outline  the  field  of  knowledge  that  it  covers  and  to  indicate  the 
boundary  lines  that  separate  it  from  other  allied  sciences.  Political 
science  may  be  brieflyjdefined  as  the  science  of  the  sfete^Jjjjra.te- 
with  mankind  viewed  as"organized  political  units.  It  includes  a 
historical  sjorvey  of  the -origin  of  the  state,  tracing  the  beginnings 
of  political  life  as  they  emerged  from  earliegjsJBcjaliorms.  It  con- 
siders, also,  the  developmenlrof  the  state  as  it  evolved  from  simple 
to  complex,  —  from  tKe  loosely  oTganized  tribal  horde  to  the  mod- 
ern state  with  its  highly  specialized  government.  Such  a  study 
must  include  not  only  the  actual  historic  evolution  of  the  state, 
but  also  the  development  of  political  ideas  and  theories,  since  they 
powerfully  influenced  state  development,  especially  after  man  began 
consciously  to  direct  and  modify  what  was  at  first  largely  uncon- 
scious growth.  Political  science  must  also  analyze  the  fundamental 
nature  of  the  state,  its  organization,  its  relation  to  the  individuals 
'tHat  compose  it,  and  its  relation  to  other  states.  In  addition,  it 

3 


4  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

must  describe  modern  states  as  they  actually  exist  and  must  com- 
pare arid  class ;fy  their  governments.  Finally,  political  science  deals, 
to  a  certain  degree,  with  what  the  state  ought  to  be, — with  the  ulti- 
mate ends  of  the  state  and  the  proper  functions  of  its  government. 
)  It  is  thus  a  historical  investigation  of  what  the  state  has  been,  an 
\  analytical  study  of  what  the  state  is,  and  a  politico-ethical  discus- 
*  sion  of  what  the  state  should  be. 

Its  leading  subdivisions,  therefore,  are  : 1 

1 .  Historical  political  science,  —  the  origin  and  development  of 
political  forms. 

2.  Political  theory,  —  a  philosophic  study  of  the  fundamental 
concepts  of  the  state. 

3 .  Descriptive  political  science,  —  an  analysis  and  description  of 
existing  political  forms. 

4.  Applied  political  science,  —  the  principles  that  should  control 
the  administration  of  political  affairs ;  the  proper  province  and 
functions  of  government. 

2.  Relation  to  allied  sciences.  Political  science,  as  one  of  the 
sciences  dealing  with  the  relations  of  man  to  man,  stands  in  close 
affiliation  with  the  other  social  sciences,  as  a  subdivision  of  a 
broader  field,  or  as  a  general  field  including  more  specialized  sub- 
divisions, or  as  an  allied  science  having  points  of  contact.  For 
example : 

1.  Political  science  and  sociology.    Sociology,  the  science  of 
society,  deals  with  man  in  all  his  social  relations.    These  may  vary 
from  commercial  or  religious  interests,  almost  world-wide  in  scope, 
to  the  single  family  or  the  narrowest  fraternal  group ;  and  such 
organizations  are,  in  many  cases,  little  concerned  with  state  bound- 
aries.   Political  science,  the  science  of  the  state,  deals  with  man 

i*  in  his  political  relations  alone.  It  views  mankind  as  divided  into 
organized  political  societies,  each  with  its  government  which  creates 
and  enforces  law.  Political  science  is  thus  narrower  than  sociology, 
and  is,  in  a  general  sense,  one  of  its  subdivisions. 

2.  Political  science  and  history.    History  is  a  record  of  past 
events  and  movements,  their  causes  and  interrelations.   It  includes 
a  survey  of  conditions  and  developments  in  economic,  religious, 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  4. 


NATURE  AND  SCOPE  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE         5 

intellectual,  and  social  affairs,  as  well  as  a  study  of  states,  their 
growth  and  organization,  and  their  relations  with  one  another. 
Economic,  religious,  intellectual,  and  social  institutions,  however, 
have  no  bearing  upon  political  science,  except  as  they  affect  the 
life  of  the  state.  On  the  other  hand,  politjc^^istoryjurnishes 
the  major  part  of  the  raw  material  for  political  scienceT^From  its 

-  -  __          — —  — —^  _       — -    ""**-  -  -  — • 

data  concerning  numerous  concrete  states  are  drawn  the  general 
conclusions  of  political  theory  as  to  the  fundamental  nature  of  the 
state ;  and  on  the  basis  of  its  information  is  built  up  the  science 
of  comparative  government.  Its  records  of  past  states,  with  their 
successes  and  failures,  also  throw  light  upon  the  vexed  questions 
of  the  best  form  of  government  under  given  conditions,  and  of 
the  proper  functions  of  governmental  activity.  History  gives  thus, 
as  has  been  aptly  said,  "the  third  dimension  of  political  science."1 
f'3.  Political  science  and  economics.  Economics,  the  science  of 
wealth,  deals  with  man's  individual  and  social  activity  in  the  pro- 
duction, distribution,  and  consumption  of  wealth,  under  conditions 
both  physical  and  psychological.  In  so  far  as  this  activity  is  indi- 
vidual, or  concerns  any  social  organization  except  the  state^  its 
relation  to  political .  science  is  remote.  An  important  part  of  eco- 
nomics, however,  deals  with  the  activity  of  the  state  in  regard  to 
wealth.  Such  subjects  as  taxation,  currency,  and  governmental 
industries  form  a  field  common  to  both  sciences,  economics  view- 
ing them  as  certain  forms  of  man's  total  activity  with  regard 
to  wealth ;  political  science  viewing  themas  certain  functions  of 
governmental  administration.  TrTaddition,  economic  conditions  ma- 
terially affect  the  organization  and  development  of  the  state ;  and 
the  state  in  turn,  by  its  laws,  frequently  modifies  economic  condi- 
tions. The  rise  of  feudal  government  on  a  basis  fundamentally 
economic  is  a  good  example  of  the  former;  and  even  a  casual 
acquaintance  with  modern  conditions  shows  the  close  connection 
existing  between  business  and  politics.  The  way  in  which  the 
state  may  influence  economic  conditions  is  illustrated  by  corpora- 
tion legislation,  tariff  laws,  and  labor  regulations. 

4.  Political  science  and  ethics.    Ethics,  the  science  that  deals 
with  conduct  in  so  far  as  conduct  is  considered  right  or  wrong, 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  5. 


6  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

also  has  points  of  contact  with  political  science.  The  origin  of 
moral  ideas  is  closely  connected  with  the  origin  of  the  state.  Both 
arose  in  that  early  group  life,  based  on  kinship  and  religion,  when 
custom  was  law  and  when  moral  and  political  ideas  were  not  differ- 
entiated. With  the  development  of  civilization  and  the  conflict 
between  private  and  group  interests,  custom  gave  way  to  con- 
science, or  individual  morality,  on  the  one  hand,  and  to  law,  or 
political  morality,  ^>nj;he  other.  Right  and  wrong  with  individual 
oTsooaTsanction  were  distinguished  from  rights  and  obligations 
with  political  sanction.  Yet  the  relation  between  morals  and  law  is 
still  close.  Moral  ideas,  when  they  become  widespread  and  power- 
ful, tend  inevitably  to  be  crystallized  into  law,  since  the  same  indi- 
viduals that  form  social  standards  are  those  that  comprise  the 
state.  On  the  other  hand,  laws  that  attempt  to  force  moral  ideas 
in  advance  of  their  time  usually  fail  in  administration.  Besides,  it 
is  from  the  ethical  standpoint  alone  that  the  state  is  ultimately 
justified ;  and  the  proper  functions  of  government  must  be  deter- 
mined in  last  analysis  on  the  basis  of  the  ethical  compromise  that 
secures  the  greatest  good  to  the  individual  and  at  the  same  time 
promotes  the  greatest  common  welfare. 

5.  Political  Science  and  Jurisprudence.  Jurisprudence,  which 
may  be  briefly  defined  as^e  science  ofUaw,  is  properly_classed  as 
a  subdivision  o^plitkaj^S£iejice.JThe  principles'^  law  in  general, 
and  the  specific  rules  that  determine  the  organization  of  a  given 
state,  its  relation  to  its  citizens,  and  the  regulations  that  it  enforces 
among  them,  together  with  such  agreements  among  states  as 
approach  definite  legal  statement  and  enforcement,  —  all  are  in- 
cluded in  a  science  that  attempts  a  complete  explanation  of  state 
existence  and  activities. 


PART  I 
THE  NATURE  OF  THE  STATE 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  II 

REFERENCES 

NEED  FOR  DEFINITIONS  AND  DISTINCTIONS 

NATION  ;  NATIONALITY 

STATE  *U^r* 

1.  TERRITORY     -fl»4>«««'«»W     °J 

/nt.  u-*      0^*^-      *^  •v^*-  -  QAL*** 

2.  POPULATION - 

3.  ORGANIZATION   /v';    l 

4.  UNITY. 

/V0.    Cx»^*V-XtjA 

SOVEREIGNTY 

GOVERNMENT   ^-^vwi  - 

DIVISIONS  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


CHAPTER  II 
PRELIMINARY  DEFINITIONS  AND  DISTINCTIONS 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  ii 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  I,  chap,  i ;  Bk.  II,  chaps,  i-v 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  I,  chap,  i; 

Bk.  II,  chap,  i 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  12-20 
LEWIS,  G.  C.  The  Use  and  Abuse  of  Political  Terms 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.   The  Nature  of  the  State,  chap,  ii 
WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  I,  pp.  139-144,  199-207 

3.  Need  for  definitions  and  distinctions.    Before  entering  upon 
a  discussion  of  the  origin  and  growth  of  political  institutions  it  is 
necessary  to  get  a  clear  idea  of  some  of  the  fundamental  concepts 
of  political  science.   This  will  not  only  give  precision  and  definite- 
ness  to  the  use  of  certain  expressions,  but  will  also  make  more 
clear  the  scope  and  divisions  of  political  science,  and  will  show  the 
relations  existing  among  these  divisions.    No  worker  in  this  field 
can  proceed  far  before  meeting  such  terms  as  "  nation,"  "  state," 
"  sovereignty,"   "government,"  and  "law."    Because  of  careless 
usage  in  ordinary  speech,  and  because  of  their  intrinsic  importance, 
a  more  exact  meaning  for  each  will  here  be  given. 

4.  Nation;  nationality.    The  term  "nation,"  from  the  standpoint 
of  etymology,  is  an  ethnic  term  (cf.  nasci)  and  is  so  used  by  the 
Germans.    In  this  sense  it  denotes  a  population  speaking  the  same 
language  and  having  the  same  customs  and  civilization,  without 
regard  to  their  political  combination.    On  the  other  hand,  English 
and  American  usage  gives  to  the  term  "  nation  "  a  political  signi- 
fication, as  denoting  a  body  of  individuals  organized  under  a  single 
government.    For  precision  in  nomenclature,  therefore,  it  seems    r, 
advisable  to  use  the  term  "nationality"  to  denote  a  population  r 
having  common  bonds  of  race,  language,  religion,  tradition,  and 
history.   These  influences  create  the  consciousness  of  unity  that 

9 


10  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

binds  individuals  into  a  nationality.  Such  a  population,  other  things 
being  equal,  tends  to  form  a  state  ;  and  the  strength  of  a  state  de- 
pends in  large  degree  upon  its  national  unity.  At  the  same  time, 
in  actual  existence,  the  boundaries  of  nationality  and  of  state  seldom 
coincide.  Almost  all  states  include  several  nationalities,  often 
widely  variant,  —  the  United  States,  the  British  Empire,  Switzer- 
land, and  the  Balkan  states  being  conspicuous  examples.  Some 
peoples,  for  instance  Jews  and  Poles,  although  for  centuries 
retaining  their  nationality,  failed  to  form  states. 

5.  State.  Since  political  science  is  the  science  of  the  state,  a 
clear  understanding  of  what  is  meant  by  the  term  "  state  "  is  all- 
important.  From  the  beginning  of  social  life  men  have  lived  under 
some  form  of  public  authority.  The  nature  of  this  authority  has 
varied,  and  it  has  exercised  its  functions  through  different  forms  of 
organization.  Beneath  these  differences  in  the  concrete  manifes- 
tations of  political  life  may  be  observed  a  practical  identity  of 
purpose ;  and  by  disregarding  nonessential  elements,  and  modifi- 
cations that  arise  because  of  the  demands  of  time,  place,  or  cir- 
cumstance, the  very  essence  of  the  state  may  be  discovered  and 
the  characteristics  that  distinguish  it  from  other  organizations  may 
be  clearly  pointed  out.  In  this  way  the  nature  of  the  state  in  the 
abstract,  the  universal  phenomenon  with  which  political  theory 
deals,  may  be  considered  apart  from  the  various  concrete  states 
that  have  existed  from  time  to  time,  whose  consideration  belongs 
to  the  field  of  historical  and  descriptive  political  science.  An 
analysis  of  'the  state  shows  its  essential  factors  to  be  : 

1.  Territory     J  ph  ^^ 

2.  Population  ) 

3.  Organization  J 

4.  Unity  J 

i.  Territory.  While  history  shows  people  in  the  hunting  and 
fishing  or  pastoral  stages  of  development,  living  under  a  tribal  form 
of  organization,  in  which  .the  idea  of  definite  territory  played  no 
part,  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  term  "  state"  is  properly  applied  to 
such  a  condition.  As  a  later  chapter  will  indicate,1  the  origin  of 

1  See  Chapter  V. 


PRELIMINARY  DEFINITIONS  AND  DISTINCTIONS     n 

the  state  is  gradual,  and  the  exact  point  at  which  an  earlier  social 
form  changes  into  a  distinct  political  form  is  difficult  to  fix.  How- 
ever, the  occupation  of  permanent  abodes  and  the  idea  of  authority 
over  definite  areas  powerfully  affected  the  rise  of  political  organi- 
zation, as  is  shown  by  the  history  of  the  Hebrews  after  their 
conquest  of  Palestine,  or  of  the  Teutons  after  their  settlement  in 
the  Roman  Empire.  At  any  rate,  the  possession  of  territory  is  a 
necessary  basis  for  al]  mnHprn  gf-^ffig,  and  the  idea  of  Jgmtefial 
sovereignty  is  firmly  imbedded  in  present  political  thought.  No 
people,  such  as  the  Jews,  scattered  over  the  earth  without  possess- 
ing a  territory  can  form  a  state.  While  some  writers  on  political 
science  1  qualify  their  assent  to  the  necessity  for  territory,  the  con- 
sensus of  opinion  considers  control  over  a  definite  part  of  the 
earth's  surface  to  be  a  fundamental  requisite  for  state  existence. 
If  the  meaning  of  the  term  is  broadened  to  include  the  general 
physical  environment,  —  the  arrangement  of  mountains,  seas,  and 
rivers,  and  those  conditions  of  climate,  soil,  and  resources  under 
which  all  states  must  exist,  —  no  one  can  deny  that  territory  is  an 
essential  and  most  important  factor  in  state  life. 

Ideas  regarding  the  area  over  which  a  state  should  extend  have 
widely  varied.  To  the  Greeks  the  narrow  boundaries  of  a  compact 
city  seemed  the  proper  limit ;  to  the  Romans  the  whole  world  was 
not  too  large  for  their  concept  of  the  state  ;  while  modern  states 
have  placed  a  certain  amount  of  emphasis  upon  natural  boundaries 
and  geographic  units.  The  influence  that  the  physical  environment 
exerts  on  state  formation  and  development  will  be  discussed  later.2 

2.  Population.  That  territory  must  be  inhabited  in  order  to 
form  a  state  is  self-evident.  Any  attempt  to  fix  definitely  the  num- 
ber of  persons  that  a  state  may  include  is  obviously  absurd,  although 
Rousseau  considered  ten  thousand  the  ideal  number;  and  Aristotle, 
placing  the  minimum  at  ten,  set  the  maximum  at  one  hundred 
thousand.3  Actual  states,  however,  have  varied  widely  in  their 
population,  the  British  Empire  to-day  numbering  over  four  hun- 
dred million,  while  several  states  contain  less  than  a  half  million 
each.  The  influence  of  population,  from  the  standpoint  of  racial 

1  Holland,  Elements  of  Jurisprudence,  loth  ed.,  p.  44.       2  See  Chapter  III. 
8  •MiVrxTvio^V.^Qn  F.thirs.  ix.  10 :   Politics,  vii,  4. 


12  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

and  national  conditions,  on  the  rise  and  growth  of  states  will  be 
discussed  later.1 

3.  Organization.  Given  a  population  inhabiting  a  definite  ter- 
ritory, the  next  requisite  is  some  method  by  which  authority  may 
be  exercised  over  these  individuals.  Some 


by  which  the  state  may  express  and  administer  its  will.  Either  as  a 
result  of  mutual  agreement,  based  on  natural  development  through 
common  race,  language,  and  traditions  ;  or  as  a  result  of  compul- 
sion, based  on  the  conquest  of  the  weaker  by  the  stronger,  some 
form  of  political*  machinery  or  government,  which  either  receives 
or  compels  obedience,  must  be  created  in  order  to  form  a  state. 
32liS  organization  is  the  only  outward  manifestation  of  the  state. 
Through  it  alone  can  the  state  have  dealings  with  its  citizens  or 
with  other  states  ;  hence  the  greater  part  of  political  science  deals 
with  states  as  concretely  organized  in  their  governments. 

4.  Unity.  Tty  unity  j>  truant  that  the  territory  and  population 
constituting  ^  <;t-nff  por.r.^1-  form  q  part  of  any  wider  political  orrani- 
zatio.n  ;  neither  can  a  state  include  any  territory  or  population  that 
does  not  form  a  part  of  it  politically.  Thus  the  so-called  "states" 
of  the  United  States  are  not  states  from  the  standpoint  of  political 
science,  since  they  form  parts  of  the  wider  political  unit,  the  United 
States,  which  itself  is  one  state.  On  the  other  hand,  Europe, 
though  a  unit  geographically,  is  not  a  state  because  it  includes  a 
number  of  separate  political  organizations,  each  of  which  is  a  state. 
Unity  involves  the  idea  of  complete  external  independence  and  of 
absolute  internal  oneness:  and  a  population  possessing  unify  in 
fnTs  sense,  if  it  occupies  a  definite  territory  and  is  organized  by 
means  of  a  government,  invariably  constitutes  a  state. 
*  6.  Sovereignty.  If,  then,  territory,  population,  organization,  and 
unity  are  the  essential  elements  of  a  state,  a  still  further  analysis 
may  be  made.  Leaving  out  of  consideration  territory  and  popula- 
tion as  the  physical  elements  or  raw  materials  of  which  a  state  is 
composed,  and  combining  organization  and  unity,  the  real  essence 
of  Jhe  ^§tatg^  is^ojinj^J:o  be  sovereignty.  Viewed  internally,  this 
rneans  Jhat_a_state  has  j^omplete  authority^over  all  the  individuals 
thatcompose  it  ;  viewed  externally  it  means  that  a  state  is 

1  See  Chapter  IV. 


•PRELIMINARY  DEFINITIONS  AND  DISTINCTIONS     13 

completely  independent  of  jhejxmtrol  of  any  other_staj£. '  Since  a 
state  possesses  unity,  no  individual  within  the  state  is  exempt  from  ' 
its  authority,  and  no  person  or  group  of  persons  outside  the  state 
can  offer  interference.  Since  a  state  possesses  organization,  it  has 
a  government  by  means  of  which  it  enforces  authority  over  its 
individuals  and  maintains  its  independence  of  other  states.  Sover- 
eignty, i.e.  absolute  authority  internally  and  absolute  independence 
externally,  is  the  distinctive  characteristic  of  the  state ;  and  a 
population  inhabiting  a  fixed  territory  and  possessing  sovereignty 
invariably  constitutes  a  state.  Stated  in  another  form,  it  may  be 
said  that  the  constituent  element  of  the  state  is  population  bu.t 
th^Uporjulation  must  possess  two  characteristics  before  it  becomes 
a  state  :  (f)  territoriality  ;  (2)  sovereignty/^ Any~^opulation  which 
possesses  a  settled  territory  and  sovereign  powers  becomes,  per  se, 
a  state.  The  sovereign  willjrf  the  state,  when  expressed  and  en- 
forced by  means  of  its  government,  is  called  law.  ~ 

7.  Government.  The  nature  of  government  has  already  been 
indicated.  It  is  the  organization  or  machinery  of  tV|p  sfatp.  All 
the  citizens  of  the  political  community  constitute  the  state  ;  a  much 
smaller  number,  though  in  modern  states  a  fair  proportion,  com- 
prise the  government.  It  includes  alHhose  persons  who  are  occu- 
pied^n  expressing  or  administering  Jhe^jwill  of^  tfie^tate,  — ^TEe" 
sum  total  oiaTTtheTegislative,  executive,  and  judicial  bodies  in  the 
central,  local,  and  colonial  organs.  Moreover,  the  terms  "executive," 
"  legislative,"  and  "  judicial  "  must  not  be  interpreted  in  a  narrow 
sense.  When  the  electorate,  through  the  suffrage,  chooses  govern- 
ing officials,  it  is  exercising  the  executive  power  of  appointment ; 
by  means  of  the  initiative  and  referendum  it  shares  in  legislation ; 
and  by  jury  service  it  becomes  a  part  of  the  judiciary.  Similarly 
the  executive  must  be  made  to  include  that  extensive  and  important 
group  of  officials  known  as  the  administration,  which,  with  its  own 
system  of  law  and  courts,  has  become  in  some  states  practically  a 
separate  department  of  government.  Finally,  some  states  have 
established  organs  exercising  the  specific  function  of  making  or 
amending  the  constitution.  These  also  form  parts  of  the  govern- 
ment. In  its  broader  sense,  then,  the  government  may  be  defined 
oo  thf>  "sum  total  of  those  organizations  that  exercise  or  may 


14  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

exercise  the  sovereign  powers  of  the  state."  l  Just  as  each  state  is 
a  unit,  so  the  government  of  each  state  is  a  unit,  although  separated 
for  convenience  into  various  departments  and  divisions.  A_staie 
cannot  exist  without  a  government,  jmd  government  exists  only  as 
the  organization  of  a  state.  While  the  term  "  state  "  is  an  abstract 
term  and  may  be  conceived  apart  from  the  existence  of  any  actual 
state,  since  all  states  are  alike  in  essence,  government  is  distinctly 
a  concr^e  term  and  its  forms  vary,  being  determined  in  each  case 
by  the  political  conditions  that  obtain  in  each  state.  Government 
is  thus  the  existing  adjustment  between  the  state  and  its  individuals, 
and  the  means  by  which  interstate  relations  are  maintained,  —  the 
machinery  through  which  the  purposes  of  the  state  are  formulated 
and  "executed. 

8.  Divisions  of  political  science.  The  preceding  discussion  of 
fundamental  concepts  indicates  the  logical  divisions  of  political 
science  and  their  interrelations.  The  analysis  of  the  state  leads 
naturally  to  a  consideration  of  the  physical  basis  of  the  state,  and 
there  the  subdivisions  are  territory  and  population.  Sovereignty, 
viewed  from  its  internal  aspect,  opens  up  the  relations  of  state  to 
individual ;  viewed  from  its  external  aspect,  it  leads  to  a  discussion 
of  international  relations  and  the  rules  called  international  law. 
Again,  when  the  ends  of  the  state  and  the  functions  of  govern- 
ment are  considered,  the  same  fundamental  distinction  between 
the  individual  on  the  one  hand  and  the  state  on  the  other  serves  as 
the  basis  of  the  opposed  doctrines  of  individualists  and  socialists. 
Finally,  since  the  state  manifests  itself  only  in  its  governmental 
organization,  a  study  of  the  origin  and  development  of  govern- 
mental forms  and  a  comparative  description  of  modern  govern- 
ments in  their  separation  into  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial 
departments,  and  their  division  into  central,  local,  and  colonial 
organs  will  occupy  a  considerable  part  of  this  volume.  Political 
science  thus  becomes,  as  defined  by  Bluntschli,2  "the  science 
which  is  concerned  with  the  State,  which  endeavors  to  understand 
and  comprehend  the  State  in  its  conditions,  in  its  essential  nature, 
its  various  forms  or  manifestations,  its  development." 

1  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  p.  144. 

2  The  Theory  of  the  State,  p.  i. 


CHAPTER  III 
PHYSICAL  BASIS  OF  THE  STATE 

REFERENCES^ 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  iv 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.   The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  Ill 

BUCKLE,  H.  T.  History  of  Civilization  in  England,  Vol.  I,  chap,  ii 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  I,  chap,  ii 

FAIRBANKS,  A.  Introduction  to  Sociology,  pp.  69-79 

FARRAND,  L.  Basis  of  American  History  (Amer.  Nation,  Vol.  II),  chaps,  i-iv 

HINSDALE,  B.  A.    How  to  Study  and  Teach  History,  chap,  x 

MAHAN,  A.  T.  The  Influence  of  Sea  Power  upon  History 

MARSHALL,  A.  Principles  of  Economics,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  IV 

MONTESQUIEU,  C.  The  Spirit  of  Laws,  Bks.  XIV-XVIII 

SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.  Economic  Interpretation  of  History 

SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.  Principles  of  Economics,  chap,  iii 

SEMPLE,  E.  C.  American  History  and  its  Geographic  Conditions 

SPENCER,  H.  Principles  of  Sociology,  Vol.  I,  Parti,  chap,  iii 

TROTTER,  S.  Geography  of  Commerce 

9.  Importance  of  the  physical  basis.  In  last  analysis  all  phe- 
nomena are  transformations  of  physical  energy,  and  the  activities 
of  the  state  are  no  exception.  Given  the  individuals  that  constitute 
the  state,  the  various  combinations  of  these  individuals,  the  natural 
environment  in  which  they  exist  and  the  interrelations  among 
these,  and  natural  science  will  explain  the  state  in  its  own  terms. 
Without  encroaching  upon  this  field,  political  science  may  at  least 
view  the  raw  materials  of  which  the  state  is  composed,  and  their 
influence  on  state  formation  and  development.  The  analysis  of  the 
essential  factors  included  in  the  state  has  already  indicated  its 
physical  basis.  Territory  and  population  1  orr  stated  more  broadly, 
nature  and  man,  are  the  foundations  of  the  state  as  they  are  of  all 
social  organizations.  A  hasty  survey  of  the  influence  that  physical 
environment  Exerts  on  state  life,  and  of  the  broader  questions  of 
race  and  the  growth  and  distribution  of  mankind  will  form  a  valu- 
able introduction  to  the  later  discussion  of  the  origin  and  develop- 
ment of  the  state,  and  to  those  activities  whose  manifestations  are 

17 


1 8  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

less  obviously  physical.  Questions  such  as,  Why  did  the  state 
arise  ?  Why  at  such  a  time  or  place  ?  Why  were  its  limits  as 
to  boundaries  and  people  thus  ?  Why  its  peculiar  organization  ? 
Why  its  particular  course  of  development  and  decline  ?  cannot  be 
answered  unless  those  institutions  and  conditions  whose  causes  are 
ultimately  found  in  the  physical  environment,  are  understood. 

It  must  further  be  remembered  that  while,  for  convenience,  the 
physical  basis  of  the  state  is  subdivided  into  (i)  the  natural  environ- 
ment, and  (2)  the  population,  the  connection  between  these  two 
is  very  close.  Man  himself  is  a  part  of  nature ;  and  his  origin, 
development,  and  distribution,  his  division  into  races,  even  his 
intellectual  make-up,  are  powerfully  influenced  by  his  surroundings. 
Every  state  consists  ultimately  of  a  number  of  individuals,  each 
having  certain  physical  and  mental  characteristics,  existing  in  cer- 
tain relations  with  one  another,  and  the  whole  existing  in  a  certain 
natural  environment.  This  environment  is  constantly  modifying 
the  life  of  both  individual  and  group ;  these  in  turn  are  constantly 
modifying  their  environment ;  and  the  relation  of  individuals  to 
one  another  modifies  both  the  individual  and  the  group.  It  is 
obviously  impossible  to  discuss  adequately  within  the  scope  of  a 
single  chapter  the  importance  of  these  elementary  factors  of  state 
development,  but  a  few  facts  and  illustrations  may  serve  to  indicate 
the  enormous  influence  that  physical  conditions  exert. 

10.  Elements  of  the  physical  environment.  The  natural  environ- 
ment includes  the  sum  total  of  all  those  influences  of  the  external 
world  that  affect  the  life  of  the  individual  or  of  the  social  group. 
Its  subdivisions  may  be  roughly  stated  as  follows  :  — 

1.  The  contour  of  the  earth's  surface 

2.  Climate 

3.  Resources 

4.  The  general  aspects  of  nature 

These  form  the  background  of  all  human  existence  and  con- 
stantly condition  all  human  institutions.  In  the  early  life  of  man- 
kind points  of  contact  with  nature  were  few,  and  dependence  on 
natural  conditions  was  almost  complete.  Growth  of  intelligence 
brought  man  into  contact  with  nature  at  an  increasing  number  of 


PHYSICAL  BASIS  OF  THE  STATE  19 

points,  and  at  the  same  time  extended  his  control  over  nature  until 
he  became  the  master  rather  than  the  slave  of  his  environment. 
Even  the  wonderful  advances  of  modern  science,  however,  are  but 
feeble  beginnings  of  man's  control  of  the  physical  environment, 
and  the  most  advanced  modern  state  is  powerfully  affected  by 
natural  conditions  with  which  the  skill  of  man  is  still  unable  to 
cope.  A  few  illustrations  under  each  of  the  above  heads  will  indi- 
cate their  importance  in  past  and  present  political  existence. 

11.  Contour  of  the  earth's  surface.  The  contour  of  the  earth's 
surface  includes  the  arrangement  of  land  and  water  areas,  the  size 
and  position  of  mountains  and  rivers,  the  extent  and  altitude  of 
land  divisions.  It  gives,  in  short,  an  earth  divided  by  nature  into 
a  number  of  land  units  of  various  sizes  and  of  various  internal 
formations,  separated  from  one  another  by  broad  water  or  high 
mountain  barriers,  or  joined  by  river  systems  or  valleys.  Some- 
times these  units  are  distinct,  with  natural  boundaries  on  all  sides, 
as  in  the  case  of  Spain,  Italy,  or  the  British  Isles,  although  these  i- 
differ  as  to  internal  unity.  Sometimes  the  natural  boundaries  are 
indistinct  or  broken  in  places,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Russian  plain 
or  the  Mississippi  valley.  Such  physical  conditions  influence  state 
existence  in  many  ways  : 

I .  The  size  of  the  ^state.  Other  things  being  equal,  the  pr^s  r>f  — . 
states  tend  to  coincide  with  thocv  p^pmpViiV  nm'/-c  Natural  bar- 
riers protect  the  people  living  within  them  from  contact  with  other 
peoples,  and  develop  those  common  interests  and  that  conscious- 
ness of  unity  which  lie  at  the  basis  of  a  state.  It  was  no  accident 
that  great  empires  grew  up  in  the  Nile  and  in  the  Euphrates  val- 
leys ;  that  the  Russian  plain,  the  Chinese  river  valleys,  and  the 
basin  of  the  Mississippi  are  the  seats  of  extended  states  at  the 
present  day.  Aside  from  the  effects  of  favorable  climate  and  fertile 
soil,  a  vast  extent  of  unbroken  area  encourages  the  formation  of  a 
state  with  great  territorial  expanse.  On  the  contrary,  nature  formed 
Greece  and  Switzerland  to  be  the  homes  of  small,  distinct  units, 
and  Europe  as  a  whole  is  adapted  to  a  number  of  states  of  com- 
paratively equal  size.  All  attempts  to  maintain  world  empire  in 
Europe  have  failed,  in  spite  of  the  genius  of  Caesar,  Charlemagne, 
and  Napoleoi 


20  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  efforts  of  man  may,  of  course,  modify  the  influence  which 
the  contour  of  the  earth's  surface  would  otherwise  exert  on  the 
area  of  states.  The  maintenance  for  several  centuries  of  Roman 
legions  along  the  Rhine  frontier  served  the  same  purpose  as  an 
impenetrable  mountain  barrier,  and  helps  to  explain  the  present 
separation  between  France  and  Germany.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
engineering  skill  of  man  and  the  development  of  transportation 
may  enable  a  single  state  to  include  several  geographic  unities,  — 
as  the  expansion  of  the  United  States  bears  witness. 

The  mere  question  of  sjze  exercises  considerable  influence  on 
sfat-p  dpyelrtprnpnt  It  was  the  expansion  of  Rome  that  checked 
her  democratic  tendencies  and  caus^rf  a  f  pan-inn  towards  the  cen- 
tralized  despotism  of  the  Empire  i_and  it  is  the  territorial  growth 
of  modern  democracies  that  ^p*-  nf>rpfici>atgd  the  present  highly 
developed  forms  of  representative  pnvernmpflf. 

2.  The  isolation  of  the  state.  The  configuration  of  the  earth 
determines  in  large  degree  whether  a  state  shall  develop  apart  from 
external  influences,  or  whether  it  shall  constantly  have  peaceful  or 
warlike  relations  with  other  states.  The  Rhine  boundary,  the  weak 
spot  in  the  frontiers  of  France  and  Germany,  has  been  the  bone 
of  contention  between  them,  and  the  battle  field  of  Europe.  Greece, 
with  her  excellent  harbors  and  her  coast  fringed  with  islands,  was 
naturally  led  to  intercourse,  trade,  and  colonization.  Spain  and 
England,  both  cut  off  by  natural  boundaries  from  neighboring 
states,  worked  out  their  political  institutions  with  little  interference, 
and  each  developed  commerce,  a  navy,  and  a  colonial  empire. 

wksj-  (\  fitfltT  gains  in  the  wav  of  protection  by  a  natural  frontier 
is  partly  offset  by  the  danger  of  provincialism  and  internal  stagna- 
Jjnn)  ar^,  in  race  of  water  boundaries,  by  the  dependence  upon 
naval  strength  to  maintain  external  rela^jnn^  The  fall  of  Spain 
was  due  both  to  her  internal  narrowness  and  to  the  loss  of  her 
colonies  as  a  result  of  naval  decline.  England,  comparatively  safe 
from  invasion,  must  maintain  a  powerful  navy  to  avoid  a  similar 
fate.  The  body  of  water  that  separates  Ireland  from  the  remainder 
of  the  British  Isles  is  largely  responsible  for  the  differences  in 
nationality  and  religion,  and  for  the  feeling  of  hostility  against 
England  that  the  -Irish-retain.  The  existence -.of  mountains  in 


PHYSICAL  BASIS  OF  THE  STATE  21 

Wales  and  Scotland  has  somewhat  similar  effects  upon  the  unity 
of  Great  Britain. 

The  arrangement  of  land  and  water  areas  largely  determines  t/ 
the  commercial  importance  of  a  state.  When  the  Nile  and  the 
Euphrates  valleys  were  the  seats  of  empire,  Phoenicia,  the  middle 
country,  facing  the  Mediterranean,  was  the  great  commercial  power. 
As  civilization  shifted  westward  and  surrounded  the  Mediterranean, 
Greece  and  Rome  in  turn  held  the  strategic  position.  The  dis- 
covery of  the  New  World  and  the  growing  importance  of  the 
Atlantic  gave  Spain,  Holland,  and  England  advantages  of  geo- 
graphic location ;  while  present  conditions,  in  the  opening  up  of 
Pacific  lands,  find  the  United  States,  facing  on  both  oceans,  in  an 
enviable  position. 

3.  The  direction  of  external  activity.  Social  as  well  as  physical 
movements  tend  to  follow  lines  of  least  resistance,  the  arrangement 
of  mountains,  rivers,  and  seas  determining  in  the  main  the  trend 
of  migration  and  of  conquest.  Greece,  with  her  chief  mountain 
system  on  the  west,  and  with  good  harbors  and  numerous  islands 
on  the  east,  naturally  came  first  into  contact  with  Oriental  peoples.  \x 
Rome,  facing  in  the  opposite  direction,  had  early  relations  with 
Carthage  and  with  the  Gauls  and  other  barbarians  to  the  west ; 
while  not  until  late  in  her  development  did  she  come  into  contact 
with  Greece,  with  whom  she  stood,  as  it  were,  back  to  back.  As  a 
result,  Greece,  compelled  at  first  to  wage  defensive  wars  against 
older  civilizations,  was  thrown  back  upon  herself  and  developed 
an  internal  life  of  remarkable  energy ;  Rome,  thrown  into  relations 
with  inferior  peoples,  naturally  began  her  career  of  external  con- 
quest that  resulted  in  world-wide  dominion  and  an  imperial  form 
of  government. 

River  valleys  have  always  formed  the  easiest  means  of  access  to 
new  lands  ;  and  mountains,  the  greatest  barriers.  The  St.  Law- 
rence and  Mississippi  invited  the  French  traders  and  missionaries 
to  scattered  settlements ;  while  the  Appalachian  Mountains  re- 
stricted the  English  colonists  to  a  narrow  strip  of  coast  for  over  a 
century.  The  resultant  spirit  of  unity  and  of  common  interests 
among  the  English  colonists  was  manifested  later.  Besides,  it  was 
no  accident  that  the  final  clash  between'  English  and  French  in 


22  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

America  should  occur  over  the  possession  of  the  headwaters  of 
the  Ohio,  one  of  the  natural  entrances  into  the  western  lands.  The 
early  migrations  of  peoples,  the  colonization  of  newly  discovered 
areas,  and  the  immigration  of  recent  times  have  all  followed  natural 
lines  of  movement.  Civilization  and  cultureas_wejllas  war  and 
conquest  expand  in  the  directions  wj^renatural  barriers  least  pre- 
vent social  intercourse.  "Irf  ancient  times  physical  features  deter- 
mined the  trails  of  savages  and  the  routes  of  caravans  ;  in  modern 
times  the  location  of  cities  and  the  direction  and  nature  of  facilities 
for  communication,  travel,  transportation,  and  trade  have  been 
fundamentally  affected  by  geographic  contour. 

12.  Climate.  Climate,  referring  especially  to  natural  conditions 
of  light,  heat,  and  moisture,  affects  the  individuals  that  compose  a 
state,  rather  than  the  state  as  a  unit.  It  is,  however,  difficult  to 
separate  its  influence  from  that  of  fertility  of  soil  and  resultant 
vegetable  and  animal  resources,  which  affect  the  group  as  well  as 
the  individual.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that  climatic  extremes  of 

^^  withjjie  higlier  forms  of  state  existence.  The 
dazzling  brilliancy  ofreflected  light  irofnaTcticsnowsor  tropical 
deserts,  the  long  nights  of  the  polar  regions,  the  extreme  cold, 
which  checks  vigorous  growth,  the  extreme  heat,  which  enervates, 
the  malarial  marshes  of  rainy  regions,  the  parched  lands  of  rainless 
areas,  —  all  these  make  existence  difficult,  and  organized  political 
life  possible  only  in  its  undeveloped  forms.  All  great  states  have 
arisen  in  areas  where  a  temperate  climate  is  combined  with  a 
moderate  amount  of  moisture.  While  the  earliest  states  emerged 
in  a  comparatively  warm  climate,  where  the  bounty  of  nature  fur- 
nished food  in  abundance  and  gave  leisure  for  social  development, 
the  highest  forms  of  state  life  arose  in  those  cooler  climates  that 
stimulated  energy,  resulting  in  continuous  progress. 

It  is  a  notable  fact  in  history  that  upland  dwellers  have  been 
conquerors ;  and  the  influence  of  rare,  dry  air,  developing  lung 
capacity  and  vigor,  is  at  least  a  partial  explanation.  Likewise, 
greater  atmospheric  clearness  and  wider  variations  in  temperature 
help  to  account  for  the  more  nervous,  energetic  type  of  man  that 
the  Anglo-Saxon  becomes  in  America.  The  effect  of  climate  on 
birth  rate  and  on  the  age  of  maturity  influences  the  state  indirectly, 


PHYSICAL  BASIS  OF  THE  STATE 


and  it  has  even  been  claimed  that  the 
and  in  cold  countries.  In  the  former,  where  population  is  dense  and 
the  contact  of  man  with  man  is  consequently  great,  crime  takes 
the  form  of  offenses  against  the  person,  —  murder,  assault,  rape  ; 
in  colder  climates,  where  sparser  population  brings  man  less  in 
touch  with  his  fellows,  and  where  the  means  of  overcoming  nature 
are  more  important,  crime  takes  chiefly  the  form  of  offenses  against 
property,  —  theft,  gambling,  and  drunkenness  being  common.  As 
a  result  different  ideas  of  morality,  influenced  somewhat  at  least 
by  climate,  will  prevail ;  and  these  in  turn  will  affect  the  laws 
and  the  organization  of  the  state.  While  it  is  of  course  easy  to 
push  such  reasoning  to  extremes,  the  truth  remains  that  political 
existence,  as  one  of  the  forms  of  social  activity,  is  modified  by 
every  phase  of  the  physical  environment  in  which  that  activity 
takes  place. 

13.  Resources.  Natural  products  which  man  may  apply  directly 
to  his  wants  are  powerful  factors  in  state  development. 

i.  Mineral  resources.  These  were  so  important  in  the  early 
stages  of  civilization  that  the  terms  ^  stone  age/'  "  bronzejige,'' 
11  iron  age,"  are  often  used  to  characterize  certain  forms  of  culture. 
From  the  standpoint  of  political  life,  those  peoples  who  were  armed 
with  weapons  of  bronze  or  iron  had  enormous  advantages  over  tribes 
that  retained  cruder  implements  of  wood  and  stone ;  and  the  con- 
quests which  naturally  followed,  necessitating  closer  organization 
and  some  form  of  rules  to  determine  the  relation  of  conqueror  to 
conquered,  were  powerful  motives  in  the  rise  of  government  and 
law.  Later,  when  gold  and  silver  had  become  standards  of  value, 
the  possession  of  these  metals  was  eagerly  sought.  Desire  for 
plunder  has  been  at  the  basis  of  many  wars  that  have~ma<}e~nor 
unmade  states ;  search  for  gold  underlay  much  of  the  early  con- 
quest and  colonization  in  the  New  World  ;  and  the  preeminence 
of  Spain  in  European  affairs  during  the  sixteenth  century  was 
largely  due  to  the  power  brought  her  by  the^  wealth  of  Mexico 
and  Peru.  In  the  modern  industrial  age  deposits  of  coal  and 
iron  are  essential,  and  those  states  fortunate  enough  to  possess 
large  quantities  of  these  minerals,  easy  of  access,  have  enormous 
advantage. 


24  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

2.  Vegetable  resources.    The_earliest  states  arose  where  nature 
furnished  food  in  abundance.    There  population  became  compara- 
tively dense  and  stable,  and  contact  of  man  with  man  developed 
civilization  and  made  political  authority  riecessary.    Rice,  grains, 
and  the  palm  tree  in  the  Old  World,  Indian  corn  and  the  banana 
in  the  New  World,  formed  the  basis  of  existence  at  a  time  when 
man  was  dependent  upon  nature  for  sustenance.    The  great  empires 
of  Egypt,  China,  Babylon,  and  India,  of  Mexico  and  Peru,  grew 
up  in  natural  granaries.    The  less  fertile  soil  of  Greece  compelled 
her  to  depend  more  and  more  upon  commerce  for  her  food  supply  ; 
and  her  chief  products,  wine  and  olive  oil,  commodities  of  large 
value  in  small  bulk,  thus  serving  as  a  means  of  exchange,  facilitated 
such  intercourse.    The  situation  of  the  British  Isles  in  the  modern 
world  is  very  similar. 

Pressure  of  population  on  the  means  of  subsistence  is  at  the, 
basis  of  the  migrations  of  early  peoples,  of  the  colonization  of  new 
lands  as  they  were  discovered,  and  of  the  immigration  of  the 
present  day.  The  thin  soil  of  New  England  and  the  abundance  of 
timber  naturally  turned  her  to  ship  building  and  trade ;  as  cotton 
became  king  in  the  South,  the  institution  of  negro  slavery  was 
firmly  fixed.  Thus  the  American  Revolution  and  the  Civil  Wrar  can 
be  partially  explained  on  the  basis  of  vegetation.  The  struggle  for 
the  Spice  Islands  was  the  key  to  much  European  history  in  the 
sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  ;  while  more  recently  the  sugar 
situation  in  Cuba  paved  the  way  for  our  war  with  Spain  and  led 
indirectly  to  territorial  expansion  and  imperialism. 

3.  Animal  resources.    The  presence  of  game  was  an  important 
factor  in  early  development,  and  upon  whether  this  game  was  large 
and  dangerous,  or  small  and  timid,  depended  the  amount  of  co- 
operation required,  and  thus,  indirectly,  the  form  of  social  organi- 
zation.   Where  the  horse,  the  cow,  and  the  sheep  existed,  the 
transition  from  the  hunting  to  the  pastoral  stage  of  economic  de- 
velopment was  possible  ;  and  this  fact  serves  as  at  least  a  partial 
explanation  of  the  advanced  civilizations  found  at  a  comparatively 
early  period  in  Asia  and  Europe.    Domestication  of  animals  marked 
a  long  stride  toward  permanent  food  supply  and  stable  organization  ; 
and,  as  it  created  a  form  of  wealth,  it  necessitated  some  kind  of 


PHYSICAL  BASIS  OF  THE  STATE  25 

property  regulation.  Absence  of  animals  suitable  for  domestication 
and  for  beasts  of  burden  helps  to  explain  the  comparative  back- 
wardness of  civilization  among  the  American  Indians  and  among 
the  aborigines  of  Australia.  Abundance  of  fish  played  an  impor- 
tant part  in  the  formation  of  the  Hanseatic  League,  the  rise  of  the 
Netherlands,  and  the  development  of  New  England ;  while  the 
fur-bearing  animals  of  North  America  determined  the  French  type 
of  colonization.  The  part  that  the  horse  played  in  medieval  feu- 
dalism has  seldom  been  adequately  appreciated,  and  the  develop- 
ment of  sheep  raising  in  England  during  the  sixteenth  century 
hastened  the  fundamental  changes  in  social  organization  that 
marked  the  rise  of  modern  democracy. 

14.  General  aspects  of  nature.    Buckle  has  pointed  out1  that 
the  type  of  man  and  of  society  is  influenced  by  the  general  aspects 
of  nature.    In  some  parts  of  the  earth  man  is  surrounded  by  nature 
in  violent  and  terrible  aspects  ;  earthquakes,  volcanoes,  hurricanes, 
avalanches,  great  mountains,  vast  deserts,  mighty  rivers,  form  the 
background  for  human  life.    Under  these  conditions,  which  appeal 
to  man's  imagination  rather  than  to  his  reason,  man  fears  nature ;' 
he  hesitates  to  investigate  and  experiment ;  he^  lacks  self-reliance  ; 
his  religion  becomes  superstitious  ;  his  art,  monstrous  ;  his  organi- 
zation, despotic.    The  course  of  civilization  in  India  and  in  Peru 
may  serve  as  examples.    On  the  other  harrd,  certain  parts  of  the 
earth  are  planned  on  a  smaller  and  more  quiet  scale.    No  awful 
phenomena  hold  man  in  terror,  and  the>  mastery  of  man  over 
natural  forces  progresses  rapidly.    In  such  circumstances  modera- 
tion, individualism,  and  reason  develop ;  art  becomes  beautiful ; 
religion,  rational;    and   the    state,  'democratic.    Such    conditions 
ancient  Greece  and  modern  Europe  exhibit. 

15.  Changes  in  environment.    While  individual  and  state  are 
thus  influenced  by  the  physical  environment  the  subordination  is 
not  complete.    The  distinguishing  feature  of  ma"  i«  hi«  ahj)i>v  ±0. 
modify  his  environment;  and  with  the    growth  rf   intP11l'pfpnp^ 
comes  the  mastery  of  man  over  natural  forces,  and  the  creation  of 
more  favorable  conditions.    Bridges  and  tunnels  decrease  the  im- 
portance  of  natural  boundaries  ;  forestry  and  irrigation  modify  the 

1  History  of  Civilization  in  England,  Vol.  I,  chap.  ii. 


26  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

climate.  The  draining  of  swamps,  as  in  England  or  Holland,  and 
the  irrigation  of  arid  lands,  as  in  Egypt  or  western  United  States, 
cannot  fail  to  influence  the  life  of  the  state  there  existing.  By 
proper  care  the  quality  of  the  soil  may  be  completely  changed ; 
fauna  and  flora  may  be  made  to  flourish  in  parts  of  the  world  re- 
mote from  their  original  homes  ;  and,  by  cultivation  and  breeding, 
the  value  of  species  may  be  wonderfully  increased. 

Almost  all  the  arts  and  inventions  that  mark  the  progress  of  civ- 
ilization are  steps  toward  the  control  of  the  natural  environment. 
By  conquering  nature,  the  constant  fear  of  unknown  danger  and  the 
uncertainty  of  food  supply  are  removed,  and  man  attains  security 
and  leisure,  both  of  which  are  necessary  for  progress.  By  the  use 
of  weapons  and  tools  man  increases  his  natural  strength  and  dexter- 
ity ;  clothing  and  artificial  shelter  enable  him  to  withstand  extreme 
climatic  changes ;  and  the  use  of  fire  gives  him  warmth  and  light, 
better  prepared  food,  the  means  of  working  minerals,  and,  finally, 
artificial  power.  Building  upon  the  crude  guesses  of  the  earlier 
alchemist,  the  modern  chemist  analyzes  the  materials  of  which  the 
earth  is  composed,  and  recombines  them  for  the  convenience  of 
mankind.  Even  the  complex  machinery  of  the  present  day,  which 
performs  intricate  processes  and  is  almost  human  in  its  uncanny 
intelligence,  is  but  the  logical  result  of  that  development,  begun 
ages  ago  by  primitive  men,  by  means  of  which  natural  forces  are 
utilized  and  natural  laws  applied  for  human  benefit. 

The  development  of  transportation  is  probably  the  most^  impor- 
tant means  by  which  man  has  conquered  nature.  The  growth  of 
commerce  and  travel,  the  methods  which  make  possible  the  trans- 
fer of  commodities  and  persons,  rapidly  and  cheaply,  from  place 
to  place,  are  breaking  down  man's  dependence  upon  geographic 
location ;  and  the  rise  and  fall  of  cities  and  of  states  are  largely 
determined  by  the  lines  of  railways,  canals,  and  ocean  traffic. 
Transmission  of  power,  a  result  of  the  development  of  transporta- 
tion, has  far-reaching  effects.  Not  only  may  coal,  wood,  and  oil  be 
used  as  fuel,  where  conditions  are  favorable  for  human  labor,  but 
human  labor  itself  may  be  transported  to  places  where  natural 
conditions  are  more  advantageous.  Recent  developments  in  the 
transmission  of  electric  power  tend  to  make  location  of  even  less 


PHYSICAL  BASIS  OF  THE  STATE  27 

importance.  Finally,  the  transmission  of  information  further  re- 
duces the  importance  of  natural  influences.  Telegraph,  telephone, 
the  mail  service,  cooperate  in  binding  the  earth  into  a  unity  and 
in  making  knowledge  international.  While  nature  still  places  cer- 
tain limitations  upon  the  activities  of  man,  the  progress  of  civiliza- 
tion is  widening  those  limits  and  making  it  more  possible  for  man 
consciously  to  direct  his  own  development  and  the  form  of  his 
institutions. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  IV 

REFERENCES 

IMPORTANCE  OF  POPULATION 

GROWTH  OF  POPULATION 

1.  BIRTH  RATE 

2.  DEATH  RATE 

DISTRIBUTION  OF  POPULATION 

1.  MIGRATION 

2.  COLONIZATION 

3.  IMMIGRATION 

RACE 

1.  INFLUENCE  ON  MOTIVE  OF  STATE-FORMING 

2.  INFLUENCE    ON    METHOD    OF    STATE-FORMING 

NATIONALITY 

1.  EFFECT    OF    RELIGION 

2.  EFFECT  OF  LANGUAGE 

3.  EFFECT  OF  COMMUNITY  OF  INTERESTS 

POLITICAL  GENIUS  OF  VARIOUS  NATIONS 

1.  SEMITIC.1  rtfluLbf* 

2.  GREEK    AND    SLAVIC  • 


3.  CELTIC  '. 

4.  ROMAN  r 

\\   -z.   5-    TEUTONIC.' 

IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL 

CONCLUSIONS 

1.  THE  RELATION  OF  GEOGRAPHIC  AND  ETHNIC 

UNITY  TO  THE  STATE 

2.  THE  PREEMINENCE  OF  THE  TEUTONS 


28 


CHAPTER  IV 

POPULATION  OF  THE  STATE 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  v 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  II 

BRINTON,  D.  G.  Races  and  Peoples,  chaps,  i-iii 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  I,  chaps. 

iii  and  iv 

FAIRBANKS,  A.  Introduction  to  Sociology,  pp.  79-86 
HINSDALE,  B.  A.  How  to  Study  and  Teach  History,  chap,  xi 
MAYO-SMITH,  R.  Statistics  and  Sociology,  Part  I 
RIPLEY,  W.  Z.  The  Races  of  Europe 
Ross,  E.  A.  Foundations  of  Sociology,  chap,  ii 
SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.  Principles  of  Economics,  chap,  iv 
TAYLOR,  I.  The  Origin  of  the  Aryans 
WEBER,  A.  F.  Growth  of  Cities,  chaps,  iii,  v,  vi 
WRIGHT,  C.  D.  Practical  Sociology,  chaps,  ii-iv,  viii 

16.  Importance  of  population.  The  physical  environment  of 
itself  can  accomplish  no  historical  result.  ^It^a^ts  always  inpon  or 
through  individuals,  determiningtheir  charact£ristics  and  con- 

*^         — —  ^ta^^^^*™""""" ^^^ — "~~^^^*^^*""""^     ^   W***"^    V^       i  —•*'*>       — — -^ 

ditioning  their  activities.  Hence  a .  study  of  the  fundamental 
elements  of  the  state  must  include  the  individuals  that  comprise  it 
as  well  as  the  circumstances  in  which  it  exists.  The_intejiiai^m-__ 
fluence  j^Jieredityniust :  be  ajjded  tQ^he^ej^maJ^Jiifluence^Qf 
environment  j  and  trieresults  of  contact  of  man_  with  man,  as  well 
as  of  man  with  jiature,  must^Berconsidered.  Just  as  political  science 
views  the  earth  as  divided  into  a  number  of  geographic  units, 
differing  among  themselves  and  tending  with  more  or  less  definite- 
ness  to  divide  mankind  into  separate  groups,  —  so  political  science 
views  mankind  as  divided  into  a  number  of  ethnic  units,  differing 
among  themselves  and  tending  more  or  less  powerfully  towards 
that  spirit  of  unity  which  creates  a  state.  The  influences  of  natural 
environment  partly  explain  the  origin  and  development  of  states ; 
the  influences  resulting  from  characteristics  of  individuals  and 
groups  of  individuals  complete  the  explanation.  Nature  and  man 
in  constant  interrelation  create  the  state. 

29 


30  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

17.  Growth  of  population.  The  growth  of  population  as  a  whole 
depends  upon  the  excess  of  births  over  deaths,  and  therefore  is 
modified  by  any  causes  that  increase  or  diminish  either  birth  rate 
or  death  rate.  Among  early  peoples  the  birth  rate  was  high,  but  a 
comparatively  small  increase  in  population  resulted  because  of  the 
correspondingly  high  death  rate.  Disease,  famine,  war,  and  at  times 
the  deliberate  removal  of  surplus  children  or  useless  aged  resulted 
in  an  enormous  waste  of  life.  The  growth  of  civilization  has  been 
a£0)mpajiied_J^  For  this  two  important 

reasons  have  been  offered  : 

1 .  The  biological  fact  that  the  powers  of  reproduction  decrease 
as  animal  life  becomes  more  complex  and  highly  organized ; 

2.  The  sociological  fact  that  deliberate  prevention  increases  in 
older  and  wealthier  civilizations.    Marriages  are  fewer  and  later, 
and  families  smaller. 

On  the  basis  of  the  above  facts  it  is  evident  that  population  is 
constantly  being  recruited  from  peoples  of  lower  civilization,  and 
from  the  lower  classes  among  these  peoples. 

At  the  same  time  the  progress  ^of  civilizatiQn_Js  ^accompanied 
by__a_jdeclining  death  rate.  Improvements  in  sanitation  check 
disease  ;  a  more  highly  developed  economic  life  prevents  famine ; 
war  becomes  the  exception  rather  than  the  rule  ;  and  society  cares 
for  its  weak  instead  of  destroying  them.  Thus,  in  spite  of  a  de- 
clining birth  rate,  population  may  increase  rapidly  and  the  waste 
of  human  life  be  avoided.  Among  the  advanced  peoples,  other 
things  being  equal,  the  death  rate  will  be  lower.  The  following 
table,  based  on  official  reports  (191 0-1911),  shows  the  annual  birth 
and  death  rates  per  thousand,  with  the  resultant  increase  in  popu- 
lation, in  leading  modern  states  : 

Birth  Rate  Death  Rate  Increase 

United  States  l 33  ...  18  ...  15 

Russia 44  ...  31  ...  13 

Austria 32  ...  22  ...  10 

Japan 34  ...  21  ...  13      , 

Germany 30  ...  18  ...  12 

England 25  ...  16  ...  9 

1  Estimated.    There  is  no  complete  national  registration  of  births  and  deaths  in 
the  United  States. 


POPULATION  OF  THE  STATE  31 

Hungary 35  ...  25  ...  10 

Italy        30  ...  22  ...  8 

Spain 33  ...  24  ...  9 

Switzerland 25  ...  16  ...  9 

France         19  ...  19  ...  o 

The  importance  of  mere  increase  in  population  on  the  rise  and 
development  of  the  state  is  enormous.  In  primitive  times  increas- 
ing numbers  caused  increasing  contact,  necessitating  organization 
and  authority.  Later,  pressure  on  the  food  supply  led  to  migra- 
tions and  conquests.  At.  present^the  size  of  pojmlafjpn  sfferM-g 
both  industrial  and  military  strength.  From  the  early  Spartans, 
who  bred  warriors  as  one  breeds  cattle,  to  modern  France,  bewailing 
her  stationary  population,  the  question  of  numbers  has  been  of  im- 
portance in  political  affairs. 

18.  Distribution  of  population.  More  important  for  political 
science  than  the  meregrowth  of  population,  which  results  from 
excess  of  birthsover  deaths,  is  the  distribution  of  this  population 
over  the  earthT Here  again  the  physical  environment  is  a  deter- 
mining factor.  Certain  areas,  because  of  their  configuration, 
climate,  or  resources,  are  adapted  to  sustain  large  populations.  It 
is  evident  that  the  size  of  the  group  will  depend  not  only  upon  the 
external  environment  but  also  upon  the  use  made  of  it  by  man. 
A  given  area,  capable  of  supporting  but  a  small  group  in  the  hunt- 
ing stage,  may  maintain  a  larger  number  if  they  are  engaged  in 
agriculture,  or  an  infinitely  larger  number  when  industry  and  com- 
merce have  developed.  In  these  favored  localities  the  excess  of 
births  over  deaths  will  be  greatest,  and  the  size  and  density  of  the 
population  will  be  further  increased  by  peoples  attracted  thither  by 
the  superior  advantages  which  such  areas  offer.  Thus,  both  the 
rate  of  increase  within  the  group,  and  the  accessions  which  groups 
receive  as  a  result  ot  movements  ot  peoples,  determine  the  distribu- 
tion ot  popul< 

iese  migrations  are  of  particular  importance,  since,  because  of 
intermarriage  and  the  influence  of  new  e^ ,  '-onment,  variations 
result  which  make  for  progress ;  and  because  such  movements 
h  ive  been  powerful  influences  on  the  origin  and  growth  of  state, 
of  government,  and  of  law.  Sometimes  the  original  inhabitants  are 


32  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

exterminated  or  enslaved ;  sometimes  they  are  driven  to  seek 
homes  in  less  favorable  sections.  The  great  migrations  of  early 
peoples,  the  periods  of  colonization  that  follow  the  opening  up  of 
new  lands,  and  the  modern  immigration  movement  are  exampl 
of  such  distribution  of  population. 

A  survey  of  man  at  any  given  time,  therefore,  shows  population 
sparsely  scattered  in  some  places,  compactly  congregated  in  others. 
In  general,  large  populations  will  be  the  more  highly  developed. 
Their  control  over  nature  makes  it  possible  to  maintain  a  dense 
population,  and  their  greater  skill  in  warfare  or  in  organization 
enables  them  to  drive  out  or  to  rule  over  inferior  peoples.  The 
importance  of  distribution  of  population  in  its  relation  to  the  state 
can  scarcely  be  overestimated.  Aggregation  of  population  in  fa- 
vored areas  leads  to  those  common  interests,  to  that  contact  of  man 
with  his  fellows,  that  results  in  a  spirit  of  unity  and  a  need  for 
organization.  Migrations  and  the  conquests  that  accompany  them 
require  closer  organization  than  a  stationary  life  demands,  and  lead 
to  some  form  of  regulation  between  ruler  and  subject,  and  between 
one  group  and  another.  The  opening  up  of  new  lands  creates  col- 
onies and  colonial  government ;  the  redistribution  of  population 
within  a  state,  as  industrial  life  develops,  leads  to  the  important 
governmental  problems  that  modern  cities  present.  The  move- 
ments of  peoples  that  destroyed  the  Roman  Empire  and  laid  the 
basis  for  modern  European  states,  the  establishment  of  the  Ameri- 
can colonies,  and  the  result  of  immigration  on  the  internal  political 
life  of  the  United  States  are  examples  sufficiently  suggestive  to 
show  the  relation  between  distribution  of  population  and  state 
development. 

The  following  table  gives  the  number  of  inhabitants  per  square 
mile  in  leading  modern  states,  in  1910-1911  : 

Belgium 652  Austria 247 

England 618  Switzerland 234 

Netherlands 475  France 189 

Japan       ........  336  Spain 100 

Italy 313  Russia 69 

Germany 310  United  States 31 

China  266 


POPULATION  OF  THE  STATE 


33 


19.  Race.    Even  a  casual  glance  at  individuals  shows  certain 
physical  similarities  and  differences.    Some  of  these  are  personal 
peculiarities  and  perish  with  the  individual ;  others  are  persistent 
and  fundamental.    On  the  basis  of  physical  make-up,  the  popula- 

of  the  earth  may  be  classified  according  to  race.  Race  simi- 
farity  seems  to  be  the  outcome  of  both  heredity  and  environment- 
but  just  how  much  is  due  to  each  it  is  difficult  to  determine. 
People  living  in  the  same  general  areas  under  similar  conditions 
of  climate,  food,  and  occupation  develop  certain  common  physical 
characteristics.  These  traits  are  handed  down  from  parent  to  child 
and  thus  perpetuated.  Naturally,  people  of  the  same  original  par- 
entage, who  remain  under  the  same  natural  conditions,  become 
racially  similar,  while  intermarriage  or  change  of  environment 
modifies  the  race  type. 

The  existence  of  races  influences  state  formation  particularly  in 
two  respects : 

1 .  A s  to  motive.    Descendants  of  the  same  ancestors,  similar  in 
physical  make-up  and  in  mental  characteristics,  develop  a  feeling 
of  unity  that  makes  political  organization  easy  and  natural.    The 
feeling  of  ra^e  supremacy  has  been  a  powerful  and  constant  social 
phenomenon.    Injearly  time£  jstrajiger  and  enemy  were  jjgjitipal, 
and  only  to  people  of  the  sametrmewere  obligations  of  morality 
or  justice  acknowledged.    Race  unity  was  essential  to  the  forma- 
tion of  the  earliest  states. 

2.  As  to  method.    Oik  the  basis  of  kinship,  which  underlies  race 
formation,  the  family Tteveloped.    In  its  expanded  forms,  the  clan 
andTfibe,  a  more  concentrated  race  spirit  created  greater  unity  and 
a  more  rigid  fornrof  organization  amse^  The  state  was,  in  many 
cases,  the  ultimate  outgrowth  of  this  organization.    Thus,  in  the 
beginning  of  political  existence,  racial  conditions  made  the  state 
possible,  and  furnished  the  framework  of  its  earliest  organization. 
Races  differ  widely  in  their  political  ability.    All  great  states  that 
have  influenced  modern  civilization  have  been  created  by  various 
brajichesofjthe  white  race ;  yellow  and  black  peoples  have  as  yet 
marniested  littlepoTiticaTgenius . 

20.  Nationality.    In  the  early  development  of  the  state,  races 
formed   the    fundamental   divisions   of  population ;  and   heredity 


34  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

created  the  feeling  of  unity  that  made  political  life  possible,  and 
furnished  the  organization  from  which  the  state  arose.  More  re- 
cently these  factors  have  become  of  little  importance  to  political 
science.  No  jnodern  state  coincides  with  _a_  race.  The  lines  of 
demarkation  that  separate  races  are  growing  less  distinct  as  peoples  >• 
more  easily  migrate  and  intermarry  ;  and  ties  other  than  those  of 
remote  kinship  unite  modern  states.  The  influences  of  heredity 
and  environment  remain,  but  to  these  physical  ties  are  added  social 
bonds  that  result  from  the  contact  of  man  with  man.  Secondary 
groups,  called  nations,  emerge,  united  by  a  common  spirit,  by 
common  customs  and  interests,  and  on  this  basis  modern  states 
have  arisen. 

Among  the  forces  binding  mankind  into  nations  may  be  men- 


1.  Religion.    In  ancient  and  medieval  times  common  religious 
beliefs  were  powerful  bonds  of  union.    Unbelievers  were  treated  as 
foreigners,  and  even  common  descent  was  sacrificed  if  it  conflicted 
with  religious  ideas.    The  permanence  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  the 
rise  of  the  Mohammedan  empire,  the  wars  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury,—  all  showed  a  fundamental  religious  basis;  and  states  con- 
sidered religious  unity  a  necessary,  condition  for  their  own  existence. 
The  growth  of  tolerance  and  freedom  of  belief  have  tended  to 
weaken  this  force ;  and  nations,  such  as  the  modern  Germans,  in 
spite  of  religious  differences,  have  become  conscious  of  'their  unity. 

2.  Language.    Common  language  is  a  powerful   influence  on 
national  unity.    People  whose  interests  are  similar  develop  a  com- 
mon speech,  and  those  whose  speech  is  not  understood  are  regarded 
as  strangers.    By  constant  use  a  national  language  keeps  awake 
the  feeling  of  unity,  and  with  the  growth  of  literature  and  the  press 
comes  that  community  of  thought  and  culture  necessary  for  national 
existence. 

3.  Community  of  interests.    People  living  in  the  same  area, 
whnsp  ^orrnpafjonff,  manner  of  Jife._aii^customs  are  similar— and 
who  have  common  ideas  of  right  and  wrong,  and  common  history 
and  traditions  resulting  from  past  political  union,  rapidly  develop 
a  national  spirit.    Most  modern  nations  have  arise 

1  Bluntschli,  The  Theory  of  the  State,  pp.  8;-8c 


POPULATION  OF  THE  STATE  35 

conditions.    These  forces,  increasing  in  importance,  have  modified 
the  earlier  groups  based  mainly  upon  physical  characteristics. 

At  the  beginning  of  state  development,  Semites,  Greeks,  Ro- 
mans, Slavs,  Celts,  and  Teutons  were  more  or  less  distinct  peoples, 
and  at  present  English,  French,  Spanish,  German,  and  other  na- 
tions are  separated  by  differences  more  purely  psychological.  Race 
and  religion  are  of  decreasing  importance,  but  language,  community 
of  interests,  and  common  ethical  standards  still  form  powerful 
national  bonds.  Hence,  as  a  survey  of  the  surface  of  the  earth 
shows  it  to  be  divided  by  nature  into  a  number  of  various  geo- 
graphic units,  so  a  survey  of  the  population  of  the  earth  shows  its 
division  into  a  number  of  various  ethnic  units ;  and  from  the 
standpoint  of  both  territory  and  population  a  natural  basis  for  the 
state  exists. 

21.  Political  genius  of  various  nations.  The  fact  that,  from  the 
standpoint  of  population,  states  tend  to  develop  on  the  basis  of 
nationality  makes  a  study  of  the  political  psychology  of  nations 
valuable.  Without  attempting  to  explain  the  reasons  for  differences 
in  political  ability,  and  remembering  that  the  political  characteristics 
of  the  same  nation  may  vary  at  different  periods  of  its  develop- 
ment, the  fact  remains  that  each  of  the  leading  nationalities  com- 
posing modern  states  has  developed  a  peculiar  form  of  political 
organization.1  The  peoples  that  have  played  an  active  part  in  the 
progress  of  modern  civilization  may  be  divided  roughly  into  the 
following  nations  :  Semites^Greeks,  Romans,  Slavs,  Celts, 
Teutons.  Of  these  the  Romans  amf^Te^iton^aTSneTT 
political  genius! 

i.  The  great  contribution  of  the  Semitic  peoples  has  been  in 
religion.  Judaism,  Christianity,  and  Mohammedanism  have  been 
their  work  ;  but  they  have  never  developed  a  great  state.  In  spite 
of  a  national  unity,  which  they  have  maintained  for  several  thou- 
sand years ;  in  spite  of  their  bravery  and  enthusiasm  in  following 
an  ideal,  as  the  Mohammedan  movement  showed ;  in  spite  of 
intellectual  keenness,  which  their  position  in  modern  trade  and 
finance  indicates,  they  have  seldom  been  independent  and  never 
united. 

1  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  30-39. 


36  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


2.  The  political  genius  of  the  ^r^k  and  of  theJSlav  seems  to 
have  been  exhausted  in  the  organization  of  small  units,  the  village 
community,  the^  city  state.    While  it  is  possible  to  have  a  highly 
developed  civic  life  on  a  small  scale,  and  while  such  a  condition 
may  be  favorable  for  progress  in  other  lines,  its  great  failing  lies 
in  the  constant  quarrels  among  the  various  units  and  in  their  weak- 
ness when  exposed  to  external  danger.    Greece  was  not  united 
until  she  was  brought  under  the  external  sway  of  Macedon  or  of 
Rome  ;  and  more  recently  the  Turk  and  the  Teuton  have  controlled 
her  destiny.   The  Slavic  population  of  Russia  has  been  organized 
by  a  ruling  dynasty  of  Teutons  ;  and  those  who  urge  self-govern- 
ment for  the  Russian  people  should  remember  that  the  political 
ability  of  the  Slav  has  shown  as  yet  little  indication  of  improvement. 

3.  The  organization  of  the  Cgltfr  has  always  taken  the  form  of 
the  clan,  based  upon  personal  allegiance  to.some_  chieftain.    Grouped 
into  small  military  states,  among  which  civil  strife  was  the  usual 
condition,   and  within  each  of  which,   government,   marked   by 
violence  and  corruption,  was  used  for  personal  advantage,  the  Celts 
have  invariably  fallen  an  easy  prey  to  better  organized  nations.    The 
very  qualities  that  prevent  the  organization  of  a  Celtic  state,  how- 
ever, are  the  ones  that  make  the  Celt  a  power  in  the  machine 
politics  of  a  state  organized  by  a  nation  of  grater  political  ability  ; 
and  it  is  therefore  not  without  significance  that  the  Irish,  unable 
to  govern  themselves,  can  come  to  America  and  govern  us. 

4.  From  the  beginning  the  Roman  nation  showed  great  political 
ability,  and  with  the  extension  of  territory,  resulting  from  its  skill 
in  arms,  went  a  corresponding  development  in  government  and 
law.    World  empire  was  the  logical  result  of  this  system,  —  vast  in 
area,  centralized  in  organization,  ariH  nnifftn"  in  1?^,    Thaadea-of 
sovejeignj^  and  a  system  of^fTvyfrnrp^ri^  thai-  gpmp»H  jinjty  and 
authority  were  their  contributions  to  politics.    Serious  objections, 
however,  may  be  urged  against  such  a  system.    Centrafeation^  tends 
to  destroy  individual  liberty,  local  self-government,  and  the  edjagaa  ... 

Jtion  that  results  from  sharing  in  political  affairs.    The  establishment 
of  unity  destroys  those  ethnic  differences  that  cause  variation,  con- 
flict, and  progress.    The  Roman  ideal  tends  to  stagnation  f 
by  internal  decline  ;  it  sacrifices  liberty  to  sovereignty  and  progress 


POPULATION  OF  THE  STATE 


37 


to  uniformity.  In  perfecting  her  political  contribution  Rome  made 
more  inevitable  her  ultimate  fall. 

5.  The  Teutons  brought  into  the  Roman  Empire  ideas  oi;  indi-^ 

self-government.  Contact  with  Roman  institutions  made  them 
femiliar'wftn  tffe  unity  and  organization  that  they  lacked,  and  the 
resultant  fusion  enabled  them  to  develop  a  system  that  combined 
liberty  and  authority,  local  self-government  and  unity,  democracy 
and  extended  area.  The  principle  of  representation _and  thejaajjorjal 


state^are  the  work  of  Teutons, 


national  state  takes  into  consideration  geographic  and  ethnic  unity, 
thus  having  a  natural  basis.  It  combines  the  local  self-government 
of  the  Greek  city  state  withihe  unity  oitEe  Ro*man  world  emj 
the  demoa'cAty  6"f  the"  sln^leljT^blmnunity  with  the  sovereignty  of 
the  greatest.  Upon  this  basis  of  national  states  have  developed  the 
external  rules  that  regulate  the  dealings  of  states  wi,h  one  another, 
and  the  internal  organization  that  reconciles  the  relation  of  state 
to  individual. 

It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  Greeks,  Slavs,  and  Celts  now 
form  parts  of  Teutonic  states  or  are  ruled  by  Teutonic  dynasties, 
and  that  even  Romance  nations  have  been  organized  on  the  basis 
of  the  Teutonic  national  idea.  At  the  same  time  Teutonic  peoples 
are  creating  colonies  in  all  parts  of  the  earth,  enforcing  their  civili- 
zation and  political  methods  upon  inferior  peoples.  The  superior 
political  genius  of  the  Teutons  is  a  powerful  argument  for  im- 
perialism. 

22.  Importance  of  the  individual.  A  discussion  of  population 
that  views  it  only  as  composed  of  a  number  of  races  and  nation- 
alities, differing  in  political  ability  and  tending  to  form  states  along 
certain  lines,  gives  but  a  one-sided  view.  Population  also  consists 
of  individuals,  of  great  men,  leaders  and  reformers.  Just  how 
much  of  political  development  is  due  to  the  spirit  of  the  time  that 
results  from  general  causes,  and  how  much  is  due  to  the  conscious 
efforts  of  individuals,  is  one  of  the  most  difficult  of  problems  ;  and 
historians  have)  held  widely  divergent  opinions  concerning  it.  To 
some,  all  profftessjs  the  work  of  ggreatjnenj  to  others,  the  indi- 
vidual is  helple§sjmlessj:he  world  is  ready  forjiim.  As  usual,  the 


38  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

truth  seems  to  lie  between  the  extremes.  Great  individuals  are 
both  causes  and  effects.  A  Caesar  or  a  Napnimn-plays  a  mighty 
part,  butjitjhejsame  time  Conditions  are  such  as  to  produce  these 
men  and  make  their  work  possible.  All  great  leaders  are  largely 
representative  of  their  age  ;  yet  they  may  modify  it  and  introduce 
new  ideas  that  may  form  the  basis  of  succeeding  development. 
After  all,  each  individual  composing  the  state  is  a  being  that  wills 
and  acts ;  and  while  at  any  given  time  it  may  be  impossible  to  dis- 
tinguish between  the  crank  and  the  reformer,  between  the  man  who 
is  opposing  the  tendency  of  his  times  and  the  man  who  is  starting 
a  new  movement  towards  a  new  age,  in  either  case  the  individual 
is  a  force  that  demands  consideration. 

Just  as  man  may  consciously  modify  the  physical  conditions  of 
the  external  world,  so  may  he  influence  those  psychical  bonds 
that  create  nations  and  states ;  and  as  the  control  of  man  over 
nature  makes  progress  rapid  in  material  civilization,  so  the 
conscious  effort  of  man  to  modify  his  political  system  makes 
possible  the  revolutions  and  reforms  that  mark  the  path  of 
state  development. 

23.  Conclusions.  The  preceding  discussion  of  the  physical  en- 
vironment and  of  the  population,  the  raw  material  of  which  states 
are  formed,  leads  to  several  important  conclusions.1 

I .  The  relation  of  geographic  and  ethnic  unity  to  the  state. 
Modern  states  have  developed  on  the  basis  of 
pqpulation  inhabiting  a^erntory  with  definite  naturalbmiridmes. 
It  is  therefore  the  duty  of  each  state  to  improve  or  perfect  both 
the  geographic  unity  of  its  territory  and  the  national  unity  of  its 
population.  If  several  states  are  included  in  flne  geographic  "^^y, 
unless  ethnic  f[jflw^r>^g  prpwnt-  it  would  seem  wise  that  they 
combine  into  a  single  state,  either  by  the  absorption  of  the  weaker 
by  the  stronger,  or,  if  ^nearly  equal  in  importance,  by  federation. 
If  one_state-eo,vers  several  geographic  units,  it  is  in  serious  danger, 
should  national  differences  coincide  with  the  natural  divisions.  If, 
however,  the  population's  homogeneous,  modern  improvements  in 
transportation  prevent  natural  barriers  from  proving  fatal.  Where 
one  state  includes  several  nationalities,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  state  to 

1  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I.  pp.  40-48. 


POPULATION  OF  THE  STATE  39 

make  strong  efforts  to  secure  national  unity.   A  corollary  of  this  is 
a  powerful  argument  against  promiscuous  immigration. 

2.  The  preeminence  of  the  Teutons.  Of  all  nations  the  Teutons 
have  manifested,  perhaps,  tjie  greatest^political  ability/^The  na- 
tional state  is  their  work  ;  they  are  the  most  successfu 


neoples  ;  they  are  spreading  their  languages,  ideas,  and  institutions 
in  all  parts  of  the  earth.  The  Latin  nations  still  point  with  pride 
to  their  culture.  The  Slavs  are  developing  a  national  spirit,  and 
have  been  remarkably  successful  in  dealing  with  Oriental  peoples. 
Japan  has  assimilated  western  ideas  and  taken  her  place  among 
the  family  of  nations.  The  Teutons  alone,  however,  find  their  ' 
internal  problems  in  a  fairly  satisfactory  condition,  and  have  energy 
for  external  activity;  and  the  best  interests  of  mankind  demand  that, 
in  the  presence  of  inferior  peoples,  political  authority  remain  in 
their  hands.  No  jnaudlin  sentiment  regarding  the  equality  of 
man  should  endanger  their  control  of  the  internal  organization  of 
modern  states.  No  hazy  ideas  concerning  the  rights  of  man  should 
prevent  them  from  governing,  and,  if  possible,  educating  in  political 
methods,  less  advanced  peoples.  As  long  as  inferior  peoples  exist, 
the  Teutonic  states  must  have  colonial  policies  ;  history  an 
political  science  do  not  admit  any  "  right  to  barbarism." 


.     OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  V 

REFERENCES 

FORCES  IN  STATE-BUILDING 

1.  KINSHIP 

2.  RELIGION 

3-  NEED  FOR  ORDER  AND  PROTECTION.  IVOv 

^.     VA*-c)o'JL/£kvM 

KINSHIP  0 

RELIGION 

1.  ANCESTOR  WORSHIP 

2.  NATURE  WORSHIP 

NEED  FOR  ORDER  AND  PROTECTION 

1.  FOR    PERSONS 

2.  FOR  PROPERTY 
EMERGENCE  OF  THE  STATE 
STAGNATION  AND  PROGRESS 


• 


40 


CHAPTER  V 
ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE 

REFERENCES 

BAGEHOT,  W.  Physics  and  Politics 

BOTSFORD,  G.  W.  The  Athenian  Constitution,  chaps,  i-iii 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  II,  chap,  ii 
"DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  chap,  i 

DE  COULANGES,  F.  The  Ancient  City,  pp.  9-154 

FOWLER,  W.  W.  The  City  State  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  chaps,  ii,  iii 

GIDDINGS,  F.  The  Principles  of  Sociology,  pp.  256-298 

JENKS,  E.  History  of  Politics,  chaps,  i-vii 

LETOURNEAU,  CH.  Property:  Its  Origin  and  Development 

MCLENNAN,  J.  F.  The  Patriarchal  Theory 
WMAINE,  H.  S.  Early  History  of  Institutions 
'MORGAN,  L.  H.  Ancient  Society 

PULSZKY,  A.  The  Theory  of  Law  and  Civil  Society,  chaps,  vi-viii 

SPENCER,  H.  Principles  of  Sociology,  Vol.  II,  Part  V,  chaps,  ii-iv 

WARD,  L.  F.  Pure  Sociology,  pp.  199-216 

WESTERMARCK,  E.  The  History  of  Human  Marriage 
'WILSON,  W.  The  State,  chap,  i 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  I,  Part  III,  chap,  i 

24.  Forces  in  state-building.  The  foregoing  discussion  of  phys- 
ical environment  and  population  contains  many  hints  as  to  the 
beginnings  of  political  life.  It  now  remains  to  consider  more  defi- 
nitely the  manner  in  which  the  state  came  into  being.  The  origin 
of  the  state  is  difficult  to  discover.  Like  other  social  institutions, 
the  state  arose  from  many  sources  and  under  various  conditions, 
and  it  emerged  almost  imperceptibly.  No  clear-cut  division  can 
be  made  between  earlier  forms  of  social  organization  that  are  not 
states  and  later  forms  that  are  states,  the  one  shading  off  gradually 
into  the  other.  However,  it  is  possible  to  indicate  the  chief  in- 
fluences that  have  created  the  state,  and  to  outline  in  general  its 
distinguishing  features. 

z  from  those  influences  of  the  physical  environment  that 
cause  mankind  to  aggregate  in  certain  places,  that  separate  one 
group  from  another,  and  that  create  ethnic  ties  among  the 

41 


42  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Individuals  of  the  groups,  thus  paving  the  way  for  state  formation, 
the  following  are  among  the  chief  forces  in  state-building : 

1.  Kinship 

2.  Religion 

3.  Need  for  order  and  protection  J^LSLt 

U '  i  $*te/vLfo&&**£> 

Each  of  these,  as  will  be  seen,  tends  to  create  that  unity  and 
organization  which  the  state  requires ;  and  the  existence,  usually, 
of  all  these  forces  in  early  social  groups  explains  both  the  reasons 
for  state  origin  and  the  form  in  which  it  first  emerged. 

25.  Kinship.  What  is  known  of  the  early  history  of  mankind 
indicates  that  social  organization  had  its  origin  in  kinship.  Not 
individuals,  but  tribes  or  groups  of  men,  who  considered  themselves 
of  the  same  blood,  formed  the  units.  The  original  bond  of  union 
and  the  original  sanction  for  authority  were  based  upon  real  or 
r^eJejidejHDlo^x^  Whether  the  patriarchal  family  was 

the^  original  form,  or  whethej:  it  was  gradually  developedas  the 
result  of  a  slow^evolution  from  an  earlier  state__ol^prorriisGuity, 
througrTvarlousstages  of  family  relationship,  is  a  question  much 
disputed.  With  this  dispute,  however,  political  science  is  little 
concerned.  It  is  sufficient  to  know  that  some  form  of  family  life 
and  some  tie  of  kinship  have  preceded  organized  political  life,  and 
that  those  peoples  who  have  contributed  to  modern  political  ideas 
and  created  modern  states  were  organized  on  the  basis  of  the 
patriarchal  family ;  and,  from  this  as  a  model,  developed  the 
authority  and  organization  of  the  state. 

The  patriarchal  family  consisted  of  the  father,  his  wife  or  wives, 
his  unmarried  daughters,  his  sons  with  their  wives  and  families, 
together  with  the  slaves  and  other  property.  Descent  was  traced 
through  a  direct  male  line  to  a  common  male  ancestor,  and  the 
authority  over  persons  and  property  was  vested  in  the  oldest  living 
male.  This  authority  was  absolute,  and  the  sons,  even  though 
married  and  with  families  of  their  own,  had  no  rights  except  of 
the  father's  granting.  The  property  and  even  the  lives  of  the 
family  were  at  his  disposal*.  Combined  families  formed  a  gens,  or 
.clan^  ovei^iich^^hief  kinsman  ruled^A  still  wider  group  of 
dansforrneaa  tribe,  composed  of  those  who  traced  descent  to  a 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE  43 

common  ancestor,  and  ruled  over  by  a  chief,  who  united  military, 
judicial,  and  religious  authority.  While  in  actual  historic  develop- 
ment it  is  probable  that  the  tribe  was  the  original  unit,  and  that, 
as  relationship  and  family  ideas  became  more  definite,  it  split  up 
into  clans  and  families,  —  at  any  rate,  its  final  organization  as  it 
approached  political  form  was  based  upon  the  patriarchal  family. 
As  the  tribe  widened  the  idea  of  kinship  remained,  and  the 
fiction  of  adoption  was  necessary  to  admit  those  whose  blood 
relationship  was  not.  direct.  Thus  a  feeling  of  unity  arose,  and 
common  interests  and  a  common  tradition  created  that  soli- 
darity which  is  necessary  for  political  life.  The  fact  that,  in 
early  states,  rights  and  obligations  were  respected  only  among 
people  of  the  same  blood,  and  that  strangers  were  necessarily 
enemies,  shows  the  strength  of  this  feeling.  The  same  general 
idea  underlies  the  haiigli£y^ic^4Drjji^^ 

scorn  of  aliens.    The  children  ofAbraham  c^Tsite-eTtHemseives  _ 
Gods  ctes^n^e^pIeT^^Trotners  were^&entiies^ ;  Awhile  to  tKe"~ 

\ »\   ^ ^-— V-^«*    —  '  .{_    __ — — ""*i~     — 1_  "  — ' 

Greeks  allnon-Greeks  were  Barbarians.  A  modified  form  of  this 
spirit  still  survives,  and  is  one  of  the  characteristic  features  of 
modern  national  states. 

The  patriarchal  family  also  furnished  the  organization  for  the 
primitive  state.  In  the  authority  of  the  chief  or  king  were  again 
found  the  religious  and  judicial  powers  of  the  father;  and  the 
leaders  of  the  various  clans  reappeared  in  an  advisory  body  or 
senate.  The  discipline  of  the  family  permeated  the  entire  organi- 
zation ;  a  clear  distinction  was  drawn  between  rulers  and  subjects, 
and  between  citizens  and  noncitizens.  L^g-standing^custpms  and 
thejdecisions  of  the_^hief^andj^ 

therefore,  furmsKed  both  the  spirit  of  junity  that  made  the  state 
the  organization  (rf  its  first^  government  The  state 
family,  ancTits  functions  were  those  of  a  combined 
group  of  kinsmen. 

Several  fundamental  differences  distinguish  the  patriarchal  or- 
ganization from  modern  society  : 1 

i.  It  was  personal,  not  territorial.  Membership  in  the  com- 
munity was  based  on  blood  rather  than  on  residence.  The  whole 

1  Jenks,  History  of  Politics,  p.  20. 


44  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

group  might  migrate  without  affecting  its  organization,  as  law  and 
jurisdiction  went  with  persons,  not  with  territory.  Early  kings 
were  kings  of  their  people,  not  of  their  land. 

2.  It  was  exchisive.    Strangers  could  be  admitted  only  by  adop- 
tion or  as  slaves.    Wholesale  admission  of  aliens,  as  permitted  by 
modern  states,  would  have  been  inconceivable. 

3.  J^was^ommunal.    In  modern   states  authority  deals  with 
individuals  ;  in  patriarchal  society  it  dealt  with  groups.    Each  man 
was  responsible  only  to  the  head  of  his  own  family,  these  men  to 
the  heads  of  their  gentes,  and  these  in  turn  to  the  tribal  chief. 

4.  //  was  noncompctitive.    Life,  even  in  its  details,  was  regulated 
by  custom.    The  idea  of  change  or  of  progress  was  looked  upon 
with  disfavor. 

Naturally,  survivals  of  patriarchal  ideas  long  existed  even  after 
the  state  was  well  developed.  Feudalism,  the  transition  between 
patriarchal  and  modern  political  organization,  in  its  relation  of  lord 
and  vassal,  its  life  on  the  manor,  and  its  guilds,  shows  clearly  the 
same  general  ideals. 

26.  Religion.  Closely  connected  with  kinship  as  a  force  in 
state-building  stands  religion.  Early  man,  surrounded  by  phenom- 
ena that  his  limited  intelligence  could  not  understand,  interpreted 
them  as  manifestations  of  supernatural  beings,,  whose  wrath  must 
be  averted  or  help  secured  by  acts  of  worship.  The  chief  mysteries 
were  man  himself  and  the  external  world.  Sleep,  dreams,  insanity, 
death,  —  all  the  psychological  problems,  which  even  to-day  are 
little  understood,  were  vastly  more  wonderful  to  primitive  man. 
Likewise  natural  phenomena,  such  as  storms  with  their  thunder 
and  lightning,  clouds  and  wind,  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  rivers 
and  the  sea,  the  changing  seasons  and  the  birth  and  death  of 
vegetation,  —  all  these,  explained  by  modern  science,  were  wonder- 
ful manifestations  of  supernatural  beings.  Such  conditions  led  to 
two  forms  of  religion,  combined  in  various  proportions  among 
all  early  peoples, — worship  of  ancestors  and  worship  of  nature. 
Every  man  was  accompanied  by  his  other  self,  or  spirit,  which, 
after  death,  remained  near  his  body  and  demanded  sacrifices  and 
ceremonies  lest  it  become  an  evil  demon.  The  spirit  of  the  power- 
ful patriarch  was  chiefly  worshiped.  Nature  also  was  personified 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE 


45 


and  grouped  into  a  family  of  deities  around  whom  abundant  tra- 
ditions and  myths  were  formed. 

Each  of  these  worships  played  a  large  part  in  early  social  life, 
ancestor  worship  in  particular  strengthening  the  family  organiza- 
tion from  which  the  state  emerged.  Tribal  solidarity  and  the 
inviolability  of  custom  and  discipline  were  enforced  by  a  religion 
common  to  all  tribesmen,  and  by  the  authority  of  a  long  line  of 
divine  ancestors.  The  power  of  the  father  and  of  the  tribal  chief 
had  the  same  sanction,  both  being  agents  of  the  gods,  in  line  for 
divine  worship  after  death.  Hence  the  authority  of  the  patriarch 
over  the  property,  conduct,  and  lives  of  his  people  was  strengthened 
by  his  positiojijjshigh^^ 

were  allowed  nosnare.  Kinship  and  religion  were  therefore  two 
aspects  of  the  same^tmng.  Religion  was  "  the  sign  and  seal  of  the 
common  blood,  the  expression  of  its  oneness,  its  sanctity,  its  obli- 
gations." l  The  power  that  such  ideas  exerted  in  strengthening 
the  unity  of  the  tribe,  the  authority  of  its  chief,  and  the  sanctity  of 
its  customs  can  scarcely  be  appreciated  to-day. 

This  religion,  however,  was  more  or  less  narrow  and  local.  As 
tribes  expanded  by  incorporation  or  conquest,  the  bonds  of  kinship 
and  of  ancestor  worship  necessarily  weakened,  in  spite  of  adoption 
and  the  fiction  of  common  origin,  found  in  all  early  states.  Nature 
worship  was  better  adapted  to  large  areas  and  diverse  peoples ; 
and  its  development,  mingled  with  remnants  of  the  old  family 
worship,  and  with  legends  of  tribal  heroes,  still  formed  a  common 
national  religion  that  served  as  a  sanction  for  government  and  law. 
Religious  and  political  ideas  were  little  differentiated,  and  obedience 
to  law  and  to  authority  rested  largely  on  the  belief  in  the  divine 
power  of  the  ruler  and  in  the  sacredness  of  immemorial  institutions. 

The  value  of  religion  in  the  evolution  of  the  state  can  scarcely 
be   overestimated.    In  the  earliest  and  most  difficult  periods  of 
political    development   religioji^jdpji£_j:ould^ 
anarchy  and  teach  reverenceand^obediencerT housancis1  ot  years 
were  needed  to  create  that  discipline  and  submission  to  aujiority^ 
on  which  all  government  must  rest,  and  the  chief  means-  in  the 
early  part  of  the  process  were  theocracies  and  despotisms,  based 

1  Wilson,  The  State,  p.  1 5. 


46  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

mainly  on  the  supernatural  sanctions  of  religion.  The  importance 
of  religion  as  a  force  in  state  evolution  was  not  limited  to  the 
earliest  states  alone.  Its  aid  has  been  invoked  every  time  a  new 
people  passed  from  barbarism  to  political  civilization.  After  the 
invasions  the  Teutons  organized  Europe  only  when  the  aid  of 
the  Roman  church  'was  given  ;  to  this  day  the  authority  of  the 
Japanese  emperor  has  a  religious  background.  Only  in  recent 
times  has  the  theory  of  divine  right  of  rulers  been  seriously  ques- 
tioned, and  its  shadow  still  lurks  behind  more  than  one  throne. 
Long  after  the  ties  of  kinship  had  been  forgotten  or  merged  in 
the  general  feeling  of  nationality,  common  religious  beliefs  were 
sufficient  to  unite  peoples,  to  support  dynasties,  to  create  states. 

27.  Need  for  order  and  protection.  In  addition  to  the  bonds  of 
kinship  and  religion,  other  forces  existed,  which,  even  in  the  ab- 
sence of  these,  would  probably  have  necessitated  some  form  of 
organization  and  authority  -;  and  which,  when  combined  with  them, 
made  the  state  inevitable.  Ko  aggregation  of  people  could  long 
exist  without  some  form  of  association,  of  communication,  and  of 
more  or  less  cooperation.  In  those  parts  of  the  earth  where 
population  became  numerous  such  conditions  were  particularly 
necessary.  Increasing  contact  of  man  with  man  compelled  some 
sort  of  regulation  concerning  personal  relations,  even  if  at  first  it 
were  nothing  more  than  the  enforced  subjection  of  the  weak  by 
the  strong,  or  the  combination  of  several  against  a  common  enemy. 
As  wealth  increased  in  the  pastoral  and  agricultural  stages,  and 
the  idea  of  property  developed,  some  regulation  concerning  things, 
as  well  as  persons,  was  needed.  Thus,  for  reasons  purely  internal 
in  the  growth  of  the  group,  arose  crude  beginnings  of  law  and 
government,  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  a  semblance  of  order 
and  protection  ;  and,  as  economic  life  advanced,  more  definite  and 
authoritative  regulation  was  demanded. 

The  external  relations  of  group  to  group  further  hastened  this 
tendency.  Peaceful  adoption  of  individuals  or  combination  of  tribes 
required  some  understanding  as  to  the  status  of  the  individual  and 
the  mutual  rights  and  obligations  of  amalgamating  groups.  Espe- 
cially did  hostile  relations  create  political  ideas.  Concerted  action 
foj^common  defense  or  aggression  strengthened  the~l^Ti3aTit;y~of 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE  47 

the  group  and  increased  the  authority  of  its  organization  ;  and  the 
result  of  conflict  demanded  regulation  concerning  the  relation  of 
conqueror  to  conquered  and  the  division  of  spoil.  The  phrase 
"  wfljjygat  theking  "  is  at  least  a  half  truth,  since  military  activity 
was  a  powerful  force/  both  in  creating  the  need  for  authority  and 
law,  and  in  replacing  earlier  family  organizations  by  systems  more 
purely  political.  Successful  war  leaders  have  become  kings  and 
nobles  from  times  prehistoric,  and  the  influence  of  warfare  in 
creating  states  can  be  traced  from  remote  antiquity  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  Germany  and  Italy  in  the  last  century. 

Thus,  in  addition  to  kinship  and  religion,  which  furnished  pow- 
erful bonds  of  union  and  which  contributed  the  organization  from 
which  the  state  usually  emerged,  the  influence  of  economic  and 
military  factors  must  not  be  ignored.  As  soon  as  man  rose  from 
the  earliest  stages  of  barbarism,  need  for  order  and  protection  for 
person  and  property,  in  the  relation  of  man  to  m?n  within  the 
group,  and  of  group  to  group  in  peaceful  and  warlike  contact,  made 
some  form  of  law,  and  of  government  to  enforce  that  law,  inevi- 
table. Further  progress  in  civilization  demanded  more  definite  and\ 
powerful  organization,  with  further  subdivision  of  governmental  \ 
duties  and  increasing  political  consciousness,  —  in  other  words, 
the  state. 

28.  Emergence  of  the  state.  Obviously  no  definite  step  in  the 
history  of  civilization  can  be  pointed  out  as  the  origin  of  the  state. 
While  a  general  ethnic  grouping  probably  occurred  before  the 
state  arose,  and  men  sometime^  developed  an  advanced  type  of 
family  life  before  they  formed  political  communities,  yet  even  when 
family  grouping  was  uncertain,  elements  of  the  state  often  appeared. 
Religious  and  political  authority  wWe  for  a  long  time  not  differ- 
entiated, and  even  when  organization  was  comparatively  highly 
developed,  it  might  be  for  purposes  '^pf  economic  cooperation  or 
temporary  military  need.  However,  tht  general  process  by  which 
states  were  formed  is  fairly  definite.  LLwas  marked  by  a  growing 

from  those  that  were  more  broadly 


al  or  religious.    Atthesame  time  political  organization  becajne 
.  Its  ^functions  were~^ubdivided  and  its  parts 


became  more  closelyjnterrelated.    Custom,  enforced  by  religion, 


48  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

grew  into  law,  created  and  enforced  by  governmental  authority. 
Political  consciousness  developed,  and  patriotism,  replacing  declin- 
ing family  and  religious  ties,  indicated  the  new  spirit  of  unity. 
,  A  number  of  causes  aided  this  transition.  Possession  jrf^per- 
manent  abodes,  due  largely  to  the  changeirom  pastoral  to  agricul- 
TuraMife/witrire^ultant  increase  in  property  and  in  population, 
demanded  protection  and  adjudication  which  the  earlier  tribal 
system  was  often  unable  to  furnish.  Seldom  did  a  tribe  expand 
into  a  state  without  considerable  mixture  of  peoples.  Both  peace- 
ful assimilation  and  conquest  required  compromises  regarding 
rights  and  duties,  and  emphasized  the  relation  of  the  individual  to 
the  whole,  rather  than  to  his  own  narrow  group.  Especially  in 
case  'of  .war  did,  political  aspects  ^deyelorj^  The  patriarch  jwhose. 
authority  was  formerly  unquestioned,  was  often  unfitted  to  lead  the 
h^ste^jcmcTji^^  for  this  purpose, "re- 

tained large  powers  if  successful.  Under  changing  conditions,  de- 
cisions concerning  disputed  points  and  new  rulings  on  questions 
unprovided  for  in  tribal  custom  created  new  concepts  of  law  and 
sovereignty.  As  the  duties  of  government  increased,  authority  was 
delegated  to  other  officials.  The  council  of  clan  chiefs  became  a 
senate  with  expanding  powers,  and  gradually  a  group  of  judicial, 
administrative,  and  legislative  bodies  was  formed. 

This  transition  from  ethnic  to  political  organization  did  not  take 
place  uniformly  or  reach  identical  results.  The  time  required  for 
the  process,  and  the  remnants  of  former  family  and  religious  bonds, 
depended  on  the  circumstances  in  which  each  state  was  formed. 
The  organization  of  government,  the  attitude  of  the  population  to 
their  rulers,  and  the  relations  existing  among  neighboring  states, 
all  varied  in  different  times  and  places.  The  chief  fact  upon  which 
emphasis  must  be  laidjs  that  thej>tate  is  a  gradual  and  natui 
historiceyolutioru^  It  is  neither  the  gift  of^dnan^powynorjthe 
deliberate^  wprkjjfjrian.  Its  beginnings  are  lost  in  that  shadowy 
past  in  which  social  institutions  were  unconsciously  arising,  and 
its  development  has  followed  the  general  laws  of  evolutionary 
growth.  In  the  words  of  a  modern  writer,  the  state  is  "  the 
gradual  and  continuous  development  of  human  society,  out  of  a 
grossly  imperfect  beginning,  through  crude  but  improving  forms 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE 


49 


of  manifestation  towards  a  perfect  and  universal  organization  of 
mankind."  1 

29.  Stagnation  and  progress.  Several  of  the  causes  that  created 
the  state  tended  to  discourage  further  change  or  growth.  It  is 
therefore  not  surprising  that  the  earliest  states  made  few  permanent 
contributions  to  political  ideas,  and  that  it  was  only  after  a  long 
and  tedious  evolution  that  the  difficult  problems  of  government 
approached  solution.  The  warm  climates Jnjwhich  social  progressM 
began  were  not  conducive  to  energy  ;  and  large  populations,  making  j 
labor  and  life  of  little  value,  minimized  thejmportance  of  the  in-  -^ 
dividual  and  prevented_initiative  and^amhifion.  Tn  fact,  the  very" 
conditions  that  were  most  necessary  at  first,  became  later  the 
greatestr^vTls.  T  hat^wrncTT  wasTnosk  neeHed  in  the  formation  of 
the  sfcate^was  discipline  and  organization.  Primitive  man  must 
subordinate  his  anarchic  selfishness  and  learn  obedience.  Under 
these  conditions  groups  with  the  best  family  systems,  the  strongest 
religious  bonds,  and  the  most  rigid  customs  survived  at  the  ex- 
pense of  more  loosely  organized  groups.  Early  states  arose  and 
maintained  themselves  only  by  perfecting  their  discipline,  by  mak- 
ing the  rule  of  the  patriarch  or  chief  more  absolute,  the  sanction 
of  religion  and  of  custom  more  inviolable.  Stagnation,  however, 
is  the  fate  of  any  organization  that  fails  to  adapt  itself  to  changing 
conditions ;  and  the  ideals  which  the  infancy  of  political  society 
created,  formed  a  system  of  caste,  of  custom,  of  superstition,  and 
of  despotism  that  still  controls  the  greater  part  of  the  world.  Prog- 
ress is  a  recent,  and,  in  many  respects,  an  exceptional  idea. 
Early  states,  cut  off  from  their  neighbors  by  natural  barriers  or  by 
vast  distances,  tended  toward  stagnation.  Freedom  from  external 
danger  led  to  a  decadent  race  stock,  and  the  lack  of  competition 
and  conflict  among  different  ideas  fixed  original  customs  the  more 
firmly. 

It  has  been  in  comparatively  recent  times,  and  in  a  small  part 
of  the  earth  only,  that  the  fixity  of  primitive  ideas  has  been  replaced 
by  the  ideal  of  progress,  and  that  the  modern  state  has  developed. 
This  was  made  possible  by  the  gradual  spread  of  civilization  west- 
ward and  by  the  movements  of  peoples.  Aside  from  the  natural 

1  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  p.  59. 


50  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

advantages  of  the  new  environment,  mere  change  of  scene  and  of 
conditions  opened  the  minds  and  modified  the  customs  of  the 
newcomers  in  spite  of  themselves.  The  contact  of  tribe  with  tribe 
slowly  but  powerfully  affected  the  ideas  of  both.  New  institutions 
were  imitated  by  some  and  forced  upon  others.  Change  once 
begun,  further  change  took  place  more  rapidly.  In  the  fermenta- 
tion of  ideas  resulting  from  these  movements  and  conquests,  the 
way  for  the  first  time  was  opened  for  individual  initiative.  Under 
new  conditions  man  disregarded  the  authority  of  former  conven- 
tions, and  success  was  followed  by  further  experiment  and  im- 
provement. It  was  by  some  such  method  that  political  life,  as 
distinguished  from  the  earlier  family  and  religious  organization, 
emerged.  The  contact  of  peoples,  with  the  resultant  mingling  or 
conquest,  broke  down  the  unity  of  kinship  ;  and  narrow  tribal  re-, 
ligion  was  replaced  by  a  belief  less  powerful  as  it  became  more 
cosmopolitan.  Thus  the  bonds  of  custom  that  fettered  Oriental 
states  were  broken  by  war  and  by  new  conditions  of  life.  The  idea 
of  individual  enterprise  and  the  possibility  of  conscious  change  and 
reform  arose,  preparing  the  way  for  new  forms  of  government  and 
for  vastly  different  ideas  of  individual  liberty. 

This  progress  has  taken  different  forms  and  has  proceeded  with 
varying  rapidity  among  different  peoples.  Injye^ejgMt  hasbeen* 
marked  bv  the  increasingcontrol  of  man,  over  th£  natural  environ- 
ment  and  by  the  growing  intellectual  ability  and  social  organization 
^'the^pulatioTT  Pl?yslcarties~oTlcinship  have  been  replaced  ,by 
psychic  ties  of  nationality  as  the  basis  for  state  formation,  and 
religious  and  political  functions  have  become  more  definite  and 
distinct.  In  this  process,  law  and  authority  have  taken  on  a  human 
rather  than  a  supernatural  sanction ;  and  the  need  for  order  and 
protection,  due  to  the  increasing  complexity  of  economic  and  social 
life,  has  become  the  chief  reason  for  political  life.  At  the  same 
time  unconscious  evolution  has  given  way  to  purposeful  action  ; 
and,  after  numerous  costly  experiments,  men  have  learned  how  to 
extend  governing  authority  safely  over  wide  areas  and  how  to  en- 
trust governing  powers  safely  to  a  large  proportion  of  the  people. 

In  this  way  authority  and  liberty  have  been  reconciled,  and  the 
state,  no  longer  looked  upon  with  dread  as  a  tyrannous  monster, 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE  5  i 

has  entered  upon  a  constantly  widening  sphere  of  usefulness. 
Many  peoples  have  contributed  to  this  progress ;  and  modern 
states,  building  upon  the  foundations  of  the  past,  are  still  occupied 
in  the  effort  to  adjust  political  institutions  to  changing  conditions 
of  civilization.  Even  those  peoples  whose  civilization  has  remained 
stagnant  for  centuries  show  signs  of  awakening,  and  the  spirit  of 
progress  created  by  the  western  nations  bids  fair  to  secure  universal 
acceptance. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  VI 

REFERENCES 
L^    EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE 

1.  ORIENTAL  EMPIRE 

2.  GREEK  CITY  STATE 

3.  ROMAN  WORLD  EMPIRE 

4.  FEUDAL  STATE 

5.  NATIONAL  STATE 

a.  Aiisokrte^  monarchy 

b.  Democracy 

THE  ORIENTAL  EMPIRE 

THE  GREEK  CITY  STATE 

THE  ROMAN  WORLD  EMPIRE 

THE  FEUDAL  STATE 

THE  NATIONAL  STATE 

GENERAL  FEATURES  OF  STATE  DEVELOPMENT 

1.  FROM  SIMPLE  TO  COMPLEX 

2.  GROWTH  OF  POLITICAL  CONSCIOUSNESS 

3.  INCREASE  IN  AREA 

4.  RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  OTHER  INSTITUTIONS 

5.  RELATION  OF  SOVEREIGNTY  TO  LIBERTY 


CHAPTER  VI 
EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE 

REFERENCES 

ADAMS,  G.  B.  Civilization  during  the  Middle  Ages 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  I,  chaps,  iii-vi 

BRYCE,  J.  The  Holy  Roman  Empire 

CUNNINGHAM,  W.  Western  Civilization  (Ancient;  Medieval  and  Modern) 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  chap,  ii 

DE  COULANGES,  F.  The  Ancient  City,  pp.  154-529 

FOWLER,  W.  W.  The  City  State  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  chaps,  iv-xi 

FREEMAN,  E.  A.  Comparative  Politics,  Lecture  III 

GIDDINGS,  F.  The  Principles  of  Sociology,  pp.  299-360 

JENKS,  E.  History  of  Politics,  chaps,  viii-xiv 

JENKS,  E.  Law  and  Politics  in  the  Middle  Ages 

SIDGWICK,  H.  The  Development  of  European  Polity 

SPENCER,  H.  Principles  of  Sociology,  Vol.  II,  Part  V,  chaps,  xvii,  xviii 

WILSON,  W.  The  State,  paragraphs  241-248,  286-350,  1352-1361,  1398-1414 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Part  III,  chaps,  iii-vi 

30.  Evolution  of  the  state.  The  preceding  chapter,  in  tracing 
the  origin  of  the  state,  found  difficulty  in  fixing  the  exact  time  at 
which  the  state  came  into  existence,  and  in  separating  political  in- 
stitutions from  other  closely  related  forms.__Similar  problems  con- 
front an  attempt  to  outline  its  historic  development.  The  state  has 
not  had  a  single  origin  or  a  continuous  evolution.  Various  states 
have  arisen  at  different  times  and  places  as  a  result  of  causes  by 
no  means  uniform.  These  states  have  had  widely  different  his- 
tories, and  have  worked  out  governmental  organizations  far  from 
similar.  Thus,  at  first  glance,  it  seems  almost  as  difficult  to  follow 
the  state's  evolution  as  itjwas  to  determin^  its  origin.  Howeverf  if 
attention  is  limited  to  those  states  that  have  contributed  to  modern 
political_forms  and  ideas,  a  fairly  unifornLcourse  oi^development 
may_be_discov£red. 

In  broad  outlines  the  state  has  evolved  through  the  following 
forms : 

53 


54  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

°'  / 

1.  Oriental  empire  '  / 

2.  Greek  city  state    * 

3.  Roman  world  empire    / 

4.  Feudal  state     / 

5.  National  state     x 

Absolute  monarchy 
>.  Democracy 

31.  The^JQriejital  empire.  The  earliest  states  naturally  arose 
where  population  aggregated  in  considerable  numbers  and  main- 
tained permanent  relations.  There  bonds  of  kinship  and  religion 
:  developed  and  the  nefed  for  adjustment  in  the  relations  of  man  to 
I  man  was  greatest,  ^arm  climate,  fertile  soil,  and  considerable 
;  area  were  required  by  primitive  men  to  support  a  large  population 
and  to  bring  about  those  relations  among  men  that  demand  gov- 
ernment. Such  areas,  furnishing  abundant  food  with  little  effort, 
attracted  surrounding  peoples  and  led  to  that  conflict  and  inter- 
mingling which  is  another  important  source  of  state  origin.  If  a 
map  of  the  world  be  examined,  it  will  show  comparatively  few 
places  that  fulfill  these  requirements.  The  greater  part  of  the 
earth's  surface  lying  in  the  warm  zone  is  desert,  swamp,  or  arid 
plateau  ;  but  in  the  eastern  hemisphere  several  rivers  pierce  this 
belt  and  in  their  valleys  all  the  requisites  are  found.  It  was 
then  no  accident  that  the  earliest  civilizations  and  the  first  states 
grew  up  along  the  Nile  and  the  Euphrates.  In  the  west  the 
plateaus  of  Mexico  and  Peru  held  a  somewhat  similar  position. 
It  was  probably  in  these  areas  that  political  organization  first 
emerged  more  or  less  distinct  from  religious  and  family  systems ; 
and  the  forms  of  state  that  arose  in  each  were,  in  their  main 
features,  similar. 

Warm  climate  and  easily  pbtained  food  made  possible  the^begin- 
m'ngs  of  social  life,  but  soon  checked  energy  and  caused  stagnation. 
AEundant  population  created  a  large  servile  class,  with  resultant 
social  differences,  castes,  and  despotism.  The  need  for  controlling 
primitive  men  unused  to  obedience,  and  the  connection  between 
religion  and  politics,  led  to  rigid  custom,  enormous  priestly  power, 
and  conservative  policy. 


EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE 


55 


The  great  areas,  without  natural  divisions,  over  which  these 
states  extended,  caused  uniformity  loose  organization,  and  ahggprp 
of,  local  interests.  The  distances  and  deserts  that  separated  states 
left  them.  isolated.  Freedom  from  external  danger  led  to  military 
weakness  and  to  the  absence  of  that  contact  which  brings  change 

and  progress.     AJ1    these  ranse*    rnrnhineH  to  rreafp  vast 


despotic  and  stagnant.  Based  on  concjues^they  had  no  reaLco- 
hesion  anji_fell  apart  whenever  the  ruling  dynasty  was  weakened,: 
based  pnjfea^.  they  represented  to  their  peoples  only  the  slave 
driver  and  the  tax  collector.  Neither  unity  in  the  state  nor  liberty 
for  the  individual  was  possible  under  such  conditions.  While  these 
great  empires  performed  valuable  service  in  establishing  the  be- 
ginnings of  culture,  and  in  familiarizing  mankind  with  authority, 
they  offered  little  hope  of  individual  or  political  progress.  Persia 
alone  among  Oriental  states  showed  political  ability,  inaugurating 
in  her  system  of_satraps  the  only  known  method  of  successfully 
governing  large  areas  before  the  Teutons  brought  representation. 
Even  Persia,  however,  did  little  to  promote  a  spirit  of  unity  among 
her  diverse  peoples.  Each  retained  its  own  language,  customs, 
and  religion  ;  and  the  ruler  of  each  province,  virtually  sovereign, 
was  always  tempted  to  make  himself  an  independent  king.  This 
system,  the  most  advanced  among  Oriental  peoples,  was  perfected 
later  b 


32.  The  Greek  city  state.  The  only  logical  direction  in  which 
early  civilization  could  spread  was  to  the  north  and  west,  ,  Crossing 
Asia  Minor,  the  Mediterranean  and  Europe  were  reached.  Here 
important  physical  differences  were  found.  P^urope  is  a  peninsula, 
oceanic  rather  than  continental.  It  has  a  climate  more  temperate 
and  products  more  varied  than  the  river  valleys  of  Asia.  The  land 
is  broken  up  into  small  units  adapted  to  both  intercourse  and  de- 
fense ;  while  the  Mediterranean,  though  permitting  communication, 
made  invasion  from  Asia  difficult.  Hence  civilization,  while  arising 
later,  reached  a  much  higher  development  than  in  Asia,  and  the 
nature  of  political  organization  was  correspondingly  different. 

Greece,  the  first  part  of  Europe  to  be  reached  from  Asia,  has 
been  called  "the  most  European  of  European  tends."  In  a  little 
district  of  ten  thousand  square  miles  are  found  in  miniature  all  the 


56  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

charactenstic_^eatures_of_^uro£e.  The  mountains  and  the  sea 
break  up  this  area  into  numerous  valleys  and  islands,  easily  de- 
fended, yet,  because  of  the  sea,  not  isolated.  In  contrast  to  the 
uniformity  of  Asia,  the  variety  and  moderation  of  nature  in  Greece 
developed  a  different  mental  attitude  and  genius.  Growing  popu- 
lation naturally  led  to  colonization  and  commerce,  the  wine  and 
oil  which  her  hillsides  furnished  being  an  excellent  medium  of 
trade.  Undex_fchese  Conditions  a  new  f  orm_oiLstate- was- -rreatftd. 
Patriarchal^ clans,  bound  by  ties  of  common  kinship_anjLr^1igJ£ln. 
securing  permanent  abodesjn_these_small  areas,  formed  compact 
units,  and,  clustering  around^ome  easilyjief ended  hill,  built  their 
little  villages.  As  these  units  grew,  sometimes  by  conquest,  some- 
times by  peaceful  union,  ties  of  kinship,  growing  more  and  more 
fictitious,  were  gradually  replaced  by  a  more  artificial  political 
organization.  The  authority  of  the  patriarch  passed  over  to  the 
king.  The  clan  elders  became  a  council  of  chiefs,  and  the  freemen 
formed  a  folkmoot  whose  approval  was  solicited  for  important 
undertakings.  Oistrmi__gave  way  t,o_jriore  definite  laws,  and  the 
city  state  was  formed. 

The  internal  development  of  these  city  states  followed,  in  general, 

>  a  uniform  course.  Kings  were  replaced  bv  oligarchsT  who  divided 
among  themselves  thelteligious,  military,  and  judicial  powers  that 
the  former  patriarch  hat!  possessed.  The  selfishness  and  oppression 

^  of  these  nobles  led  to  the  rise  of  "tyrants,"  who  suppressed  the 
nobles  by  the  aid  (^mercenary  armies  antl  popular  support.  A  de- 

j  jnocracy,  more  or  less  broad,  usually  followed,  as  the  people,  learning 
their  strength,  removed  the  tyraVits  whose  power  they  had  made  pos- 
sible. Thus  eacfy  city  developed  an  intense,  patriotic  life,  regarding 
neighboring  cities  as  enemies,  though  allowing  much  liberty  and 
large  powers  of  government  to  its  own  citizens.  But  this  de- 
mocracy, adapted  to  the  city  state,  was  effective  only  over  small 
areas.  Its  perfection  intensified  jealousy  and  prevented  the  forma- 
tion of  a  national  state.' 

Lack  of  unity  and  organization  was  the  chief  weakness  of  the 
Greek  political  system.  Facing  east,  Greece  came  first  into  contact 
with  the  more  advanced  Oriental  peoples,  and  was  compelled  to 
wage  defensive  wars.  This  checked  expansion  and  compelled  more 


EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE 


57 


concentrated  internal  development.  Mutual  jpalnnsy  prevented  any 
union  except  loose  confederations,  and  frequent  wars  destroyed  in 
turn  the  power  of  the  leading  cities.  Greece,  thus  weakened,  was 
at  length  united  only  when  conquered  by  some  outside  power,  such 
as  Macedon  or  Rome. 

In  one  respect  the  city  state  made  an  important  contribution  to 
political  thought.  Self-government  and  individual  liberty  Karl  been 
developed,  and  on  this  basis  a  brilliant,  if  brief,  civilization  had 
arisen.  The  remainder  of  the  world,  however,  was  not  yet  ready 
for  democracy,  much  in  the  way  of  organization  and  authority  first 
being  needed.  This  unity  was  secured  by  Macedon  and  Rome  at 
the  expense  of  democracy,  and  the  work  necessary  for  modern 
civilization  destroyed  the  Greek  contribution  to  politics.  It  was 
not  until  the  Teutons  grafted  their  inrlwirlnalism  nr)  "Roman  organi- 
zation that  democracy,  stable  over  large  areas,  became  possible. 

33.  The  Roman  world  empire.  The  beginnings  of  political  life 
in  Italy  were  very  similar  to  those  in  Greece.  Natural  advantages 
of  location,  climate,  and  resources  led  to  increase  of  population, 
mingling  of  peoples,  and  advance  in  civilization.  While  the  mass 
of  inhabitants  lived  in  loose  tribal  organizations,  a  number  of  small 
city  states  gradually  arose.  One  of  these,  at  first  by  no  means  the 
most  important,  was  formed  by  the  union  of  several  tribes  occupy- 
ing a  group  of  hills  in  the  fertile  plain  of  the  Tiber.  A  number  of 
causes  led  to  the  preeminence  of  this  city.  Its  central  position  and 
its  location  at  the  head  of  navigation  of  the  only  important  river 
were  of  considerable  advantage.  Besides,  the  various  settlements 
on  neighboring  hills  soon  compelled  isolation  to  yield  to  federation 
or  conquest,  and  numerous  hostile  neighbors  kept  alive  warlike 
ability  and  compelled  fusion  of  peoples.  Thus  in  Rome  the  rigid 
fetters  of  custom  were  broken  earlier  than  usual ;  and  necessary 
compromise  and  treaty,  resulting  from  the  relations  of  various 
tribes,  started  the  growth  of  ^Rome's  wonderful  system  of  law,  and 
the  work  of  conquest  began  that  was  finally  to  create  the  Empire. 

The  early  internal  development  of  Rome  showed  the  same  tend- 
encies as  the  Greek  city  states.  King,  council,  and  assembly 
grew  out  of  the  patriarchal  family  organization  ;  monarchy  was 
replaced  by  aristocracy,  as  consuls,  praetors,  and  senate  replaced 


58  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  king  ;  and  a  strong  movement  toward  democracy  was  indicated 
by  the  widening  of  the  assemblies  and  the  increased  privileges  of 
the  plebeians.  Before  this  tendency  toward  a  more  or  less  demo- 
cratic, compact  city  state  could  be  carried  to  its  logical  conclusion, 
as  had  been  done  in  Athens,  a  new  series  of  events  changed  the 
whole  course  of  Roman  development,  resulting  in  a  new  type  of 
state  and  in  several  important  contributions  to  political  ideas. 

Geographic  conditions  in  the  main  account  for  the  difference  in 
Jhe  trend  of  Greek  and  Romanpolitics. Italy  is  better  adapted 
for  internal  unity  than  Greece.  The  divisions  are  larger  and  less 
distinct,  the  plains  and  uplands  better  suited  to  agriculture  and 
grazing,  and  the  absence  of  harbors  and  islands  offers  fewer  ad- 
vantages for  commerce.  Hence,  while  civilization  came  later, 
energy  was  kept  at  home  until  Italy  was  united  into  a  single  state 
under  Rome's  headship.  The  direction  of  external  effort  further 
affected  Rome's  political  progress.  With  the  Apennines  near  the 
eastern  coast,  and  the  fertile  plains,  rivers,  and  harbors  on  the 
west,  Rome  naturally  had  little  contact  with  Eastern  peoples  until 
her  institutions 'were  well  established.  On  the  contrary,  she  faced 
toward  Gaul  and  Spain,  and,  through^  Sicily,  toward  Africa.  Her 
first  wars  were  with  inferior  nations  and  led  naturally  to  conquest, 
to  expansion  of  territory,  and  to  the  civilizing  of  fresh,  vigorous 
peoples.  Later  the  East  also  came  under  her  sway,  her  central 
position  enabling  her  to  concentrate  her  forces  and  conquer  her 
enemies  in  detail. 

/It  was  this  career  of  conquest  and  expansion  that  compelled 
_Rome  to  develop  a  new  form  of  state.  The  city-state  constitution 
broke  down  when  it  was  applied  to  a  wide  empire,  and  the  tendency 
toward  democracy  was  checked  by  the  need  for  a  vigorous,  con- 
sistent" policy  in  dealing  with  various  peoples  in  all  parts  of  the 
earth.  Real  power  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  firmy,  which  alone 
could  control  the  provinces,  and  of  the  mob  at  Rome,  who  alone 
exercised  political  rights ;  and  the  attempts  of  various  leaders  to 
control  one  or  both  of  these  resulted  in  the  series  of  civil  wars  that 
marked  the  end  of  the  republic.  Empire  was  the  inevitable  out- 
come of  such  conditions.  Con  r.en.  {ration  of  authority,  uniformity 

of  law,  centralized  organization,  —  these  were  needed  to  bind  the 


EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE  59 

wide  domain  of  Rome  into  a  state  and  to  secure  order  throughout 
her  realm.  How  well  Rome  succeeded  in  creating  a  successful 
imperial  organization  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  her  rule  lasted  for 
five  centuries  in  the  West  and  for  fifteen  centuries  in  the  East.  The 
Christian  church  developed  its  organization  on  a  Roman  basis ; 
the  ideal  of  world  empire  long  outlived  the  destruction  of  actual 
unity ;  and  Roman  law  and  Roman  methods  of  colonial  and 
municipal  administration  underlie  modern  systems.  Sovereignty 
and  citizenship  were  worked  out  by  Rome,  and  her  methods  of 
binding  divergent  nations  into  political  unity  have  never  been 
surpassed. 

The  formation  of  this  united  and  well-governed  empire  was  not 
accomplished,  however,  without  accompanying  evils.  To  secure 
authority,  individual  freedom  was  sacrificed  ;  local  self-government 
disappeared  as  centralized  administration  grew.  Greece  had  de^. 
veloped  democracy  without_unity ;  Rome  secured  unity  without 
democracy.  Rome's  system  prevented  political  education,  and  its 
very  perfection  brought  about  its  ultimate  fall.  The  ability  to  com- 
bine sovereignty  and  liberty,  to  make  democracy  possible  over 
large  areas,  and  to  secure  the  best  interests  of  both  individual  and 
state  was  reserved  for  a  later  time  and  a  new  people.  Rome  con- 
tributed but  one  side  of  political  development,  —  sovereign  organi- 
zation, —  although  that  was  the  side  most  needed  at  that  period 
of  state  formation. 

34.  The  feudal  state.  The  internal  decline  of  her  world  empire 
made  it  increasingly  difficult  for  Rome  to  maintain  her  fron- 
tiers against  those  Teutonic  barbarians  whom  she  had  been  unable 
to  conquer.  Great  numbers  of  these  were  gradually  admitted  and 
many  found  service  in  the  army.  By  the  fifth  century  A.  D.  the 
boundaries  'were  so  indistinct,  the  army  so  largely  barbarian,  and 
the  pressure  along  the  frontiers  so  great,  that  the  declining  empire 
in  the  West  fell  to  pieces  and  was  parceled  out  among  the  various 
Teutonic  tribes.  The  work  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  the  gradual 
fusion  of  Roman  and  Teutonic  population  and  institutions,,  the 
former  predominating  in  the  south  of  Europe,  the  latter  in  the  north. 
This  process  was  marked  at  first  by  considerable  destruction.  IrL 
the  Dark  Ages  Roman  civilization  and  Roman  political  ideas^ 


60  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

seemed  almost  lost.  Toward  the  close  of  this  period  the  Renais- 
sance marked  the  gradual  emergence  of  many  of  the  old  ideas  and 
institutions,  modified,  of  course,  by  ideas  and  institutions  of  the 
Teutons.  The  result  of  this  process  was  modern  civilization  and 
the  modern  state ;  and  during  the  process  such  political  life  as 
existed  was  largely  of  the  peculiar,  transitional  form  commonly 
known  as  "feudal." 

To  a  complete  understanding  of  the  feudal  state  some  knowl- 
edge of  political  methods  among  the  Teutons  is  necessary.  Before 
entering  the  Roman  Empire  their  organization  was  that  tribal 
form  which  usually  grew  out  of  the  patriarchal  family.  Largely 
because  of  physical  conditions,  the  Teutons  continued  their  rural 
organization  and  had  not  created  a  city  state.  This  emphasized 
the  importance  of  the  individual  as  opposed  to  the  sovereignty  of 
the  state.  Such  authority  as  existed  was  based  largely  on  personal 
loyalty.  Leaders  were  chosen  by  the  people,  and  ability  in  those 
lines  that  a  vigorous,  warlike  people  love  was  the  basis  of  choice. 
Popular  assemblies  in  the  various  units  were  held  and  all  freemen 
had  a  voice  in  public  affairs.  Teutonic  ideas  of  law  and  justice, 
while  crude  and  unsystematic,  contained  possibilities  of  growth 
and  added  an  important  element  to  the  Roman  law  which  had  been 
codified  and  was  in  danger  of  stagnation. 

These  elements,  emphasizing  individualism,  liberty,  and  local 
self-government,  were  directly  opposed  to  the  Roman  ideals  of 
authority  and  centralization  ;  and  the  immediate  result  of  their 
fusion  was  the  apparent  destruction  of  all  organized  political  life. 
The  absence  of  central  authority  and  the  need  for  some  form  of 
protection  and  order  placed  political  power  in  the  hands  of  every 
man  that  was  strong  enough  to  wield  it.  An  undeveloped  economic 
system  made  land  the  chief  form  of  wealth,  and  as  land  was  par- 
celed out  among  the  conquerors,  governing  authority  went  with 
it.  Thus  were  brought  together  the  holding  of  land,  the  exercise  of 
political  power,  and  the  Teutonic  personal  relation  of  vassal  and 
lord.  The  increasing  wealth  of  the  leaders,  the  influence  of  Roman 
ideas,  and  the  confusion  of  the  times  strengthened  this  nobility, 
while  the  popular  assemblies  decreased  in  importance  and  in  some 
parts  of  Europe  disappeared.  Thus  Europe  was  split  up  into  a 


EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE 

large  number  of  political  fragments,  some  of  which  were  held  to- 
gether by  more  or  less  definite  ties  to  a  common  superior,  though 
in  practice  each  fragment  knew  no  law  but  its  own.  Such  a  con- 
dition naturally  resulted  in  disorder  and  anarchy,  in  conflicting 
laws  and  authorities,  in  the  complete  subordination  of  the  mass  of 
the  people.  Neither  unity  nor  liberty  was  possible  in  feudalism, 
and  the  political  development  of  centuries  seemed  wasted. 

The  only  institution  that  retained  its  unity  during  the  Middle \ 
Ages  was  the  church.  Growing  up  on  the  ruins  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  it  adopted  imperial  organization,  and  its  power  was  further 
strengthened  by  the  superstitious  reverence  in  which  it  was  held 
by  the  barbarians.  The  absence  of  strong  government  and  the 
power  of  religious  ideas  over  the  minds  of  men  led  the  church  to 
take  upon  itself  many  functions  of  the  state.  Preservation  of  peace 
and  order  was  largely  in  its  hands,  and  with  its  growing  wealth 
in  land  came  corresponding  political  authority.  E^en  a  separate 
system  of  law  and  of  courts  was  developed,  and  its  monopoly  of 
learning  made  great  churchmen  the  chief  officials  and  advisers  in 
government.  Thus  another  element  was  added  to  the  already  con- 
fused sovereignties;  and  the  way  was  paved  for  the  bitter  conflict 
later  between  church  and  state. 

In  spite  of  actual  conditions  the  idea  of  a  common  superior,  re- 
sulting from  the  prestige  of  the  Roman  Empire,  and  the  idea  that 
it  should  be  eternal,  survived ;  and  the  titles  of  king  and  emperor 
remained,  even  though  their  holders  had  little  real  authority.  Nat- 
urally the  church  was  the  champion  of  authority,  and  by  its  aid 
efforts  were  made  to  restore  the  political  unity  of  Europe.  Charle- 
magne came  nearest  to  success,  but  his  work  was  temporary  and 
his  successors  could  not  again  unite  even  his  domains.  Decen- 
tralization, doubtful  sovereignty,  conflicting  laws,  union  of  church 
and  state,  and  the  association  of  landholding,  political  power,  and 
personal  allegiance,  —  these  characterized  the  politics  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  The  world  empire  of  Rome  had  been  destroyed  and  as  yet 
no  new  form  of  state  had  arisen  to  replace  it. 

35.  The  national  state.  Out  of  the  chaos  of  feudalism  a  definite 
form  of  political  life  gradually  appeared.  As  population  became 
stationary  and  common  interests  developed  it  became  increasingly 


62  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

evident  that  new  states  would,  in  general,  follow  ethnic  and 
geographic  lines.  Bonds  of  nationality,  language,  and  religion, 
strengthened  by  natural  boundaries,  grouped  the  feudal  fragments 
into  more  and  more  permanent  combinations  ;  and  France,  Spain, 
England,  Switzerland,  Holland,  Russia,  and  later  Germany  and 
Italy,  arose.  This  separation  into  distinct  states,  each  with  its  own 
national  spirit,  destroyed  the  idea  of  a  common  superior  and  made 
possible  the  rise  of  international  law  and  the  modern  theory  of  the 
sovereignty  and  equality  of  states.  Similarly,  the  growth  of  a  strong 
government  in  each  of  these  states  attacked  the  influence  of  the 
church  and  separated  more  clearly  religious  and  political  ideas, 
although  more  than  a  century  of  religious  wars,  civil  and  interna- 
tional, were  needed  before  this  distinction  was  realized. 

These  national  states  emerged  as  absolute  monarchies.  The 
great  enemies  of  centralized  authority  were  the  feudal  nobles,  and 
their  destruction  was  necessary  before  a  strong  state  could  exist. 
The  crusades  killed  off  many  of  these  nobles  and  ruined  others ; 
in  England  the  Wars  of  the  Roses  served  the  same  purpose.  The 
growth  of  industry  and  commerce  and  the  rise  of  towns  created 
other  forms  of  wealth  in  addition  to  land,  making  the  nobles  no 
i>  longer  the  only  wealth¥_dasjs  ;  and  the  invention  of  gunpowder 
destroyed  their  military  supremacy.  As  the  power  of  ^^  nnhjjiiy 
dirnini^hcd  their  strength,, passecL  into  the  hands  of  the  growing 
kings.  The  mass  of  the  people,  just  rising  from  serfdom,  ignorant 
and  unorganized,  were  no  match  for  the  monarchs  when  the  nobles, 
who  had  so  long  stood  between  them  and  the  kings,  were  gone. 
In  fact,  in  many  cases,  the  people  welcomed  the  strong  government 
of  their  kings,  partly  because  they  desired  peace  and  security,  and 
partly  because  of  the  growing  national  spirit  that  centered  around 
the  monarch  as  representing  the  state.  In  this  general  way  arose 
the  absolute  monarchy  of  the  Tudors  in  England,  of  Charles  V  in 
Spain,  of  Louis  XIV  in  France.  A  national  state  with  centralized 
government  in  the  hands  of  an  absolute  monarch  —  organization 
without  freedom  —  was  the  immediate  nnfpjnwth  ^f  th?  H^- 
feudal  system  ;  and  the  series  of  dynastic  wars  and  alliances 
that  mark  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  indicates  both 
the  strength  of  the  monarchs  and  the  rivalry  of  the  separate  nations. 


I/  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE  63 

As  might  be  expected,  the  development  of  national  states  was 
not  uniform.  Local  conditions  and  past  historic  development  gave 
each  state  its  own  peculiar  form.  In  England,  where  the  strong 
monarchy  of  the  conquering  Normans  had  early  sprnrpr|  unity, 
feudalism  never  flourished,  and  the  Teutonic  population,  retaining 
their_dejnDcratic  institutions,  early  began  the  struggle  against  rcyal^ 
authority^.  It  was  only  when  the  nobles,  who  were  allied  to  the 
lower  classes  more  closely  in  England  than  elsewhere,  had  been 
weakened  that  this  gradual,  democratic  development  was  checked 
and  the  absolute  monarchy  of  the  Tudors  and  Stuarts  became 
possible.  On  the  other  hand,  absolute  monarchy  was  the  logical 
outcome  of  French  conditions.  Starting  with  the  most  complete 
feudal  decentralization, .  the  Capetian  line  had  been  gradually  ex- 
tending its  territory,  perfecting  its  administration,  securing  uni- 
formity of  law  and  a  national  army  and  finance.  A  centralized 
French  monarchy  had  been  their  ambition  for  centuries.  Germany 
and  Italy,  because  of  their  connection  in  the  Holy  Roman  Empire, 
—  causing  every  aspiring  German  ruler  to  waste  his  resources  in 
devastating  Italy,  —  because  of  their  long  struggle  with  the  papacy, 
and  because  they  were  the  battle  ground  of  Europe  in  both  religious 
and  territorial  wars,  were  unable  to  secure  national  unity  and  strong 
government  until  the  nineteenth  century. 

The  next  step  concerns  the  conflict  of  king  and  people  within 
the  state.  With  the  growth  of  intelligence  and  wealth  the  mass 
of  the  people  demanded  more  political  rights  and  privileges.  The 
overthrow  of  the  feudal  system  destroyed  the  innumerable  vertical 
groups  of  society  and  led  to  a  horizontal  division  into  classes  or 
estates  that  had  common  aims  and  interests.  In  addition  to  this, 
representative  government  was  created.  Thus  both  the  motive  and 
the  machinery  of  democracy  existed,  and  absolutism  in  reality 
hastened  its  progress.  Power  in  the  hands  of  a  monarch  was  more 
apparent  and  more  easily  attacked  than  when  possessed  by  a  num- 
ber of  feudal  aristocrats,  and  when  the  divine  authority  of  the  ruler 
was  questioned,  the  people  began  to  realize  that  power  lay  in  their 
hands  if  they  wished  to  wield  it.  The  last  century  witnessed  the 
rise  of  democracy,  accompanied  by  more  or  less  disturbance  in 
proportion  as  the  old  order  was  established  and  refused  to  yield. 


64  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Here  again  the  process  was  not  uniform  in  all  states.  In  Eng- 
land the  growth  of  democracy  —  the  completion  of  a  process  long 
begun  —  was,  in  the  main,  gradual  and  peaceful.  In  France  it 
meant  a  complete  break  with  past  tendencies,  and  caused  the  ter- 
rors of  the  Revolution  and  the  rise  of  a  Napoleon.  Elsewhere  the 
monarchs  learned  wisdom  by  experience,  and  yielded  as  political 
consciousness  spread  among  their  peoples.  Local  self-government, 
with  representation  for  common  affairs,  has  been  the  usual  arrange- 
ment that  resulted.  In  most  cases  the  king  has  remained  as  a 
historic  figurehead,  but  real  sovereignty  has  passed  to  a  larger 
proportion  of  the  population  and  the  state  rests  on  a  broad  basis. 
Thus  modern  democratic  national  states  represent  the  most  ad- 
ivanced  form  of  state  evolution.  With  ethnic  and  geographic  unity 
[they  have  a  strong  natural  basis  ;  and,  by  combining  local  self- 
government  and^ representation,  they  secure  that  adjustment  of 
lifoty  and  sovereignty  which,  even  over  large  areas^may  subserve 
the  interests  of  both  individual  and  society.  However,  many 
linor  relations  within  the  state  are  still  difficult  to  adjust,  and  the 
relations  of  state  to  state  are  as  yet  by  no  means  satisfactory. 

At  the  present  time  two  tendencies,  both  powerful,  yet  in  many 
respects  antagonistic,  exist.  On  the  one  hand  is  the  emphasis 
placed  on  ethnic  and  geographic  unity.  The  national  state,  with 
well-defined  natural  frontiers  and  with  a  homogeneous  and  united 
people,  seems  to  be  the  goal  toward  which  the  development  of  the 
past  five  centuries  has  tended  ;  and  states  wage  war  to  secure  or 
maintain  their  "jiatural  boundaries,"  and  use  every  means  to  in- 
crease the  solidarity  of  their  population.  A  number  of  well-organ- 
ized, yet  distinct  and  often  rival,  national  states  is  the  logical 
outcome  of  this  movement.  On  the  other  hand  many  influences 
interfere  with  this  process.  The  formation  during  the  last  few 
1  centuries  of  great  colonial  empires,, composed-of  widely  scattered 
areas  and  most  divergent  peoples,  has  tended  to  destroy  the  geo- 
graphic and  ethnic  unity  on  which  the  national  state  is  based.  The 
growth  of  enlightenment,  which  makes  sympathy  more  cosmopoli- 
tan and  the  unity  of  mankind  more  real,  is  breaking  down  the 
former  narrower  ideas  of  patriotism  and  national  supremacy. 
Finally,  the  enormous  expansion  of  economic  interests,  by  which 


EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE  65 

the  whole  world  has  j^ojrg_gLging1p  marlrpi-;  wi>b  iradp  nn  longer 
limited  by  natural  or  political  boundary  lines,  is  striking  a  powerful 
blow  at  the  very  foundation  of  the  national  state.  Whether  these 
apparently  opposite  tendencies  are  in  reality  only  two  sides  of  the 
same  movement,  looking  to  the  formation  of  a  world  federation  on 
the  basis  of  national  units,  the  future  alone  will  reveal. 

36.  General  features  of  state  development.  The  preceding  dis- 
cussion gives  a  brief  survey  of  the  evolution  of  the  state  among 
those  peoples  that  have  contributed  to  modern  political  thought. 
Several  generalizations  may  be  drawn  from  this  material : 

1 .  As  in  the  evolution  of  all  organizations,  the  process  has  been 
from  the  simple  to  the  complex.    Governmental  organs  have  differ- 
entiated and  their  functions  become  more  definite,  and  this  process 
has  been  accompanied  by  increasing  unity  as  the  interrelation  of 
part  and  part  became  more  complete.    Consequently  the  authority 
of  the  state,  which  was  at  first  uncertain  and  irregular,  grew  more 
definite,  at   the   same  time   making   possible   greater  individual 
freedom,  since  the  action  of  the  state  was  no  longer  capricious 
or  despotic. 

2.  The  development  of  the  state  has  been  accompanied  by  the 
growth  of  political  consciousness  and  £UjrrjoseluL-aciiao«.  Early 
stages  of  social  union  were  largely  intuitive,  but  man  gradually 
came  to  realize  the  possibility  of  change  due  to  his  own  efforts. 
Laws  originated  from  legislation  as  well  as  from  ancient  custom ; 
governmental  organization  was  remodeled,  its  functions  narrowed 
or  expanded  ;  and  the  idea  of  reform  arose.    As  political  conscious- 
ness spread  over  a  constantly  widening  proportion  of  the  state's 
population,  democracy  developed,  and,  as  sovereignty  rested  ulti- 
mately on  a  more  extended  basis,  the  existence  of  the  state  became 
more  stable. 

3.  In  general  an  increase  in  the  area  and  population  over  which 
the  sovereignty  of  the  state  extends,  characterizes  the  evolution  of 
the  state.    While  this  process  has  not  been  uniform,  as  a  com- 
parison of  the  Roman  Empire  in  the  past  with  several  small  states 
at  the  present  time  bears  witness,  it  is  sufficiently  marked  to  merit 
attention.    Four  modern  states  control  more  than  half  the  entire 
land  area  of  the  globe,  the  British  Empire  alone  covering  over 


66  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

one  fifth.  When  compared  with  the  large  number  of  political 
communities  into  which  primitive  man  was  grouped,  the  half  hun- 
dred sovereign  states  of  the  present  day  show  considerable  prog- 
ress toward  unity.  The  advance  in  political  ability,  making  possible 
the  successful  working  of  governmental  organization  in  large  areas, 
the  development  of  communication  and  transportation,  and  the 
improvements  in  economic  conditions,  enabling  a  given  area  to 
support  a  dense  population,  —  all  tend  to  increase  the  size  of  the 
state  and  the  number  of  its  citizens.  Obviously  the  form  of  gov- 
ernment and  the  power  of  a  state  in  peace  and  war  will  be  affected 
by  the  extent  of  territory  and  by  the  number  of  inhabitants,  size 
being  a  source  of  strength  or  of  weakness,  depending  upon  condi- 
tions in  each  state. 

4.  State  development  has  been  marked  by  the  separation  of 
politics  from  some  institutions  and  by  increasing  governmental 
interference  in  others.  Religion,  which  at  first  was  closely  bound 
up  in  state  existence,  is  to-day  almost  entirely  separate  ;  the  private 
life  of  individuals  is  under  less  state  supervision  than  formerly. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  idea  that  the  state  should  carry  on  certain 
activities  which  public  welfare  demands,  and  which  individuals  can- 
not or  will  not  undertake,  is  gaining  ground.  Education,  sanitation, 
the  care  of  defectives,  and  the  punishment  and  prevention  of  crime 
are  illustrations  of  this  line  of  growth.  During  the  past  century, 
especially,  the  fundamental  changes  in  political,  economic,  and 
social  life  have  caused  a  complete  reversal  in  the  attitude  of  man 
to  the  state.  Instead  of  the  individualism  that  opposed  the  exten- 
sion of  state  functioning,  there  is  now  a  growing  demand  for 
increased  activity  on  the  part  of  the  government. 

At  the  same  time  this  state  interference,  now  eagerly  demanded, 
differs  from  the  bitterly  opposed  state  interference  of  earlier  cen- 
turies. That  was  executive  in  nature,  irregular  and  often  capricious 
in  enforcement,  and  removed  in  sanction  from  popular  control. 
Such  governmental  encroachment  has  been  greatly  reduced.  The 
expanding  authority  of  the  modern  state  is  legislative  in  nature, 
and  our  detailed  statutes,  multiplying  year  by  year,  are  at  least 
fairly  definite  and  uniform,  and  have  their  origin  in  popular  repre- 
sentative bodies.  However  dangerous  in  the  future  the  zeal  for 


EVOLUTION  OF  THE  STATE  67 

making  laws  may  become,  men  have  not  yet  wholly  lost  their 
traditional  hatred  of  executive  power  or  their  trust  in  represent- 
ative assemblies. 

5.  In  many  ways  the  most  significant  general  feature  of  state 
development  is  the  method  by  which  the  compromise  between 
state_  sovereignty  and  individual  liberty  has  been  workecLjiut. 
Primitive  man,  untamed  and  anarchistic,  needed  to  be  taught 
obedience ;  hence  the  first  successful  states  were  those  whose  cus- 
toms were  most  rigid  and  whose  organization  was  most  despotic. 
Such  a  system  was  fatal,  however,  both  to  progress  on  the  part  of 
the  individual  and  to  unity  when  the  state  expanded.  On  this 
basis  the  Oriental  empires  possessed  neither  organization  nor  free- 
dom. The  Gjggks,  in  developing  individual  liberty,  sacrificed 
unityj  Rome,  perfecting  her  orgamzaljoji^cjM  The 

Teutpjog,  combining  their  political  ideas  with  the  ruins  of  Roman 
institutions,  ultimately  evolved  the  modern  democratic  national 
state,  man's  most  advanced  political  product.  In  it  the  diminutive 
size  of  the  city  state,  too  weak  to  carry  on  the  activities  necessary 
for  public  welfare,  is  avoided,  as  well  as  the  unwieldy  and  stagnant 
uniformity  of  the  world  empire.  Physical  basis  of  ethnic  and  geo- 
graphic unity  is  utilized  and  political  bonds  are  strengthened  by 
common  interests  which  seem  natural  and  inevitable. 

Finally,  by  the  principles  of  local  self-government  and  repre- 
sentation, an  .organization  whiclusecures  unity  injpgjmTiori  affairs 
without  sacrificing  individual  liberty  is  made  possible,  and  de- 
mocracy over  large  areas  is  at  last  secured.  That  the  ultimate 
form  of  the  state  has  been  reached  is  not  likely.  The  balance  be- 
tween sovereignty  and  liberty  is  too  nicely  adjusted  to  be  easily 
maintained,  and  tends  always  toward  despotism  on  the  one  hand 
and  anarchy  on  the  other.  Constant  vigilance  is  necessary  to  pre- 
serve this  balance  under  changing  conditions,  and  no  two  modern 
states  are  agreed  as  to  what  is  the  proper  adjustment,  or  how  best 
to  secure  it.  Later  chapters  on  comparative  government l  will  out- 
line existing  conditions  in  leading  states,  and  the  final  chapters2 
on  the  proper  functions  of  government  will  suggest  the  relative 
merits  of  different  systems. 

1  See  Chapters  XVI-XXIII.  2  See  Chapters  XXIV-XXV. 


68  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Present  conditions  indicate  a  decided  tendency  toward  uni- 
formity among  the  most  important  states,  both  in  the  form  of 
their  organization  and  in  the  nature  of  their  activities ;  and  the 
growing  unity  of  civilization  will  probably  compel  the  future  de- 
velopment of  all  states  to  follow  similar  channels.  Each  state  may 
thus  imitate  the  successful  institutions  developed  by  its  neighbors, 
and  may  avoid  the  evils  which  experience  elsewhere  has  made 
evident.  European  states,  making  powerful  efforts  to  secure  na- 
tional unity  and  to  create  ethnic  solidarity,  watch  with  interest  the 
results  of  race  mingling  due  to  unrestricted  immigration  to. the 
United  States.  France,  in  her  zeal  to  establish  a  democratic  form 
of  government,  imitates  both  the  cabinet  system  of  England  and 
the  presidential  system  of  the  United  States,  regardless  of  their 
inherent  contradictions.  Socialism  bids  fair  to  become  an  inter- 
national political  party.  The  evolution  of  each  state  has  reached 
the  point  where  it  is  profoundly  modified  by  conscious  direction 
and  by  the  influence  of  other  states. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  VII 

REFERENCES 
*-"  IMPORTANCE  OF  POLITICAL  THEORIES 

1.  INDICATE   GENERAL   CONCEPTS  AND  PROBLEMS  OF 

POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

2.  INDICATE  CONDITIONS  AND  SPIRIT  OF  THEIR  AGE 

3.  INFLUENCE  POLITICAL  DEVELOPMENT 
ANCIENT  POLITICAL  THEORY 

1.  ORIENTAL  POLITICAL  THEORY 

2.  GREEK  POLITICAL  THEORY 

3.  ROMAN  POLITICAL  THEORY 
MEDIEVAL  POLITICAL  THEORY 

1.  THE  TEUTONS 

2.  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH 
MODERN  POLITICAL  THEORY 

1.  THE  FORCE  THEORY 

2.  THE  UTILITARIAN  THEORY 

3.  THE  DIVINE  THEORY 

4.  THE  SOCIAL-CONTRACT  THEORY 

5.  THE  ORGANIC  THEORY 

THE  DIVINE  THEORY 
X7   THE  SOCIAL-CONTRACT  THEORY 

1.  THE  NATURE  OF  THE  THEORY 

a.  The  "  state  of  nature  "  and  "  natural  law  "    . 

b.  The  political  compact 

c.  The  governmental  compact 

2.  HISTORIC  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  THEORY 

a.  Hobbes's  theory 

b.  Locke's  theory 

c.  Rousseau's  theory 

3.  CRITICISM  OF  THE  THEORY 

a.  Historical 

b.  Legal 

c.  Rational 

69 


70  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

THE  ORGANIC  THEORY 

1.  NATURE  OF  THE  THEORY 

2.  CRITICISM  OF  THE  THEORY 
PRESENT  POLITICAL  THEORY 

1.  AS  TO  THE  ORIGIN  OF  THE  STATE 

2.  AS  TO  THE  NATURE  OF  THE  STATE 

3.  AS  TO  THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  THE  STATE 


CHAPTER  VII 

THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE 

REFERENCES 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  I,  chap,  vii ;  Bk.  IV,  chaps,  vi-x 

BOSANQUET,  B.  The  Philosophical  Theory  of  the  State,  chap,  i 

DUNNING,  W.  A.  A  History  of  Political  Theories 

FIGGIS,  J.  N.  The  Theory  of  the  Divine  Right  of  Kings 

GIERKE,  O.  Political  Theories  of  the  Middle  Ages 

GRAHAM,  W.  English  Political  Philosophy  from  Hobbes  to  Maine 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  Essays  on  Government,  No.  IV 

MERRIAM,  C.  E.  American  Political  Theories 

MERRIAM,  C.  E.  History  of  the  Theory  of  Sovereignty  since  Rousseau 

OSGOOD,  H.  L.  The  Political  Ideas  of  the  Puritans 

POLLOCK,  F.  An  Introduction  to  the  History  of  the  Science  of  Politics 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  Political  Theories  of  the  Ancient  World 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  pp.  30-118 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  I,  pp.  144-198 

Works  illustrating  Political  Theory  at  Different  Periods : 

PLATO.  Republic ;  Statesman ;  Laws  (4th  C.,  B.C.) 

ARISTOTLE.  Politics  (4th  C.,  B.C.) 

CICERO.  De  Republica;  De  Legibus  (ist  C.,  B.C.) 

AUGUSTINE.  De  Civitate  Dei  (5th  C.,  A.D.) 

AQUINAS.  De  Regimine  Principum  (i3th  C.) 

DANTE.  De  Monarchia  (about  1310) 

MACHIAVELLI.  The  Prince  (about  1513) 

CALVIN.  Institutes  of  the  Christian  Religion,  Bk.  IV  (1536) 

BODIN.  Six  Books  concerning  the  State  (1576) 

HOOKER.  Ecclesiastical  Polity  (1594) 

GROTIUS.  The  Law  of  War  and  Peace  (1625) 

HOBBES.  Leviathan  (1651) 

FILMER.  Patriarcha  (1680) 

LOCKE.  Two  Treatises  of  Government  (1690) 

MONTESQUIEU.  The  Spirit  of  the  Laws  (1748) 

ROUSSEAU.  The  Social  Contract  (1762) 

BENTHAM.  Fragment  on  Government  (1776) 

AUSTIN.  Lectures  on  Jurisprudence  (4th  ed.,  1879) 

MAINE.  Early  History  of  Institutions  (4th  ed.,  1885) 

37.  Importance  of  political  theories.  All  early  social  organiza- 
tions arose  spontaneously,  and  for  a  long  time  grew  without  con- 
scious direction.  Later  a  point  was  reached  when  man,  realizing 

7* 


72  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

what  was  taking  place,  began  to  modify  his  institutions.  As  a 
result  he  was  led  to  examine  their  nature  and  to  attempt  an  ex- 
planation of  their  phenomena.  To  this  general  process  the  develop- 
ment of  political  institutions  forms  no  exception.  At  first  man 
obeyed  authority  from  fear  of  physical  or  supernatural  force,  or 
from  unreasoning  custom ;  but,  as  political  consciousness  arose, 
he  attempted  rational  explanations  of  political  power.  Crude  be- 
liefs, mingled  with  concepts  by  no  means  political,  were  followed 
by  more  reasonable  theories,  which,  sometimes  in  advance,  some- 
times lagging  behind,  in  general  kept  pace  with  actual  political 
methods. 

There  are  therefore  two  phases  in  the  evolution  of  the  state. 
One  is  the  pbjective.  concrete  development  of  states  as  manifested 
in  their  jyovernmentsVnd  external  dealings^  the  other  is  the  sub- 
jective development  of  ideas  as  to  the  state  in  general.  In  political 
theory,  as  in  actual  political  organization^,  a  continuous  growth  may 
be  traced.  Principles  of  government  are  handed  down  from  age 
to  age,  each  state  by  its  experience  modifying  former  concepts,  and 
these  in  turn  influencing  the  states  that  follow.  At  any  given  time 
political  philosophy,  if  analyzed,  will  be  found  to  consist  of  a  num- 
ber of  theories,  more  or  less  systematic,  representing  current  con- 
ceptions of  political  principles.  Sometimes  they  aim  to  explain 
the  actual  manner  in  which  the  state  originated,  or  to  describe  its 
nature  by  analyzing  existing  manifestations.  Often  they  are  ideal 
speculations  as  to  what  the  state  should  be.  Again  the  question  at 
-  issue  is  a  rational  justification  of  state  authority.  Why  should 
/  states  exist  ?  Whence  comes  their  authority  ?  What^  limit  is  there 
to  this  power  ?  By  what  right  do  particular  persons  express  and 
administer  the  state's  will  ?  In  some  theories  a  general  explanation 
of  trre~state  ls"essayed ;  in  others,  a  one-sided  idea  arises  to  sup- 
port some  practical  necessity  or  to  bolster  up  a  preconceived  belief. 
Some  truth  may  be  found  in  all  of  them,  and  a  brief  survey  of  the 
leading  theories  is  important  for  several  reasons  : 

I.  They  throw  light  on  the  general  concepts  and  problems  of 
political  science.  The  fundamental  ideas  underlying  these  theories, 
and  their  attitude  to  the  great  questions  with  which  political  science 
must  deal,  are  necessary  to  a  complete  understanding  of  the  subject, 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE 


73 


since  by  means  of  these  theories  general   concepts  have  been 
formed  and  problems  have  been  realized  and  partially  solved. 

2.  They  indicate  the  conditions  and  spirit  of  their  age.    Political 
theories  have  always  been  dependent  upon  actual  conditions,  ex- 
plaining the  institutions  and  reflecting  the  motives  and  ideals 
underlying  current  political  thought.   A  knowledge  of  these  theories 
is  therefore  indispensable  to  historical  political  science. 

3.  They  influence  political  development.    Not  only  were  these 
theories  the  outgrowth  of  actual  conditions,  but  they  in  turn  led 
men  to  modify  political  institutions,  thus  being  both  cause  and 
effect.    Changing  conditions  created^,  aew^  theories ;  these  in  turn 
influenced  actual  political  methods.    Theory  and  practice  have  gone 
hand  in  hand.    No  one,  for  instance,  can  understand  the  life  of 
the  Middle  Ages  without  a  knowledge  of  medieval  theory  concern- 
ing the  relations  of  church  and  state.    Neither  can  the  growth  of 
democracy  be  explained  without  reference  to  the  theories  on  which 
it  rested. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  state  that  in  viewing  the  various 
theories  that  men  have  from  time  to  time  created,  the  historical 
attitude  must  be  maintained.  However  absurd  or  impossible  these 
ideas  may  seem,  they  were  natural  results  of  the  conditions  and 
spirit  of  their  age,  and  played  their  part  in  making  modern  political 
theory  and  organization  possible. 

38.  Ancient  political  theory.  Political  theory  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  term  can  scarcely  be  said  to  have  existed  previous  to 
the  rise  of  f-™^-  philosophy,  yet  from  earliest  times  men  must 
have  had  some  ideas  concerning  the  authority  which  they  obeyed. 
While  our  knowledge  of  early  thought  is  small,  yet  certain  prin- 
ciples that  primitive  men  conceived  as  underlying  political  institu- 
tions may  be  pointed  out  with  a  fair  degree  of  accuracy.  The 
Qnost  striking  feature  was  the  lack  of  distinction  between  the  sanc- 
tignajof  religion,  custom,  and  law.  Divine  sanction  accompanied 
almost  every  act,  customary  obligation  regulated  conduct,  and  the 
idea  of  change  was  abhorrent.  Mingled  with  these  were  tribal  and 
family  ideas  basedLon  varying  degrees  of  kinship.  Another  char- 
acteristic was  thGshspnrg  of  deliberate  purpose.  Political  units 
were  formed  either  by  the  disintegration  of  larger  units  or  by 


74  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

combination  resulting  from  force.  Two  important  principles  that 
gradually  arose  during  this  early  period  were  (i)  that  political 
authority  should  be  exercised  over  a  definite  arpa  rather  than 


iental  empires  never  created  a  political  theory.  Morality 
and  law  were~not  clearly  distinguished  ;  speculations  were  based 
upon  tradition  and  belief  rather  than  on  reason  ;  and  sufficient 
political  liberty  to  permit  questioning  never  existed.  The  general 
form  of  state  that  they  created  was  a  hereditary,  despotic  monarchy, 
>with  religion_Jji£-safiefeion  far  ^irhnp'ty  and  with  thfr  prifigjIy^HRss 
very  powerful^  They  contributed  the  idea  of  empire  based  on 
force,  with  the  union  of  its  parts  resting  mainly  upon  payment  of 
tribute.  Several  new  ideas  were  added  by  the^Hebrews.  A  stronger 
national  spirit  resulted  from  their  more  spiritual  religion  ;  and  their 
government,  while  essentially  theocratic,  developed  democratic  ele- 
ments. The  idea  of  a  contract  or  covenant  in  which  the  Hebrews 
promised  obedience  in  return  for  divine  favor,  the  force  of  public 
opinion  on  all  questions  of  importance,  and  the  codes  of  laws  that 
they  created,  all  show  more  advanced  political  ideas.  X 

In  contrast  to  Oriental  peoples  the^Gre^ks  had  no  fixed  dngfoas 
and  no  powerful  priestly  class.  Their  gods  differed^jrjicft-  them- 
selves only  in  degree,  and  nature  was  ruled  by  beneficent  reason. 
Naturally  they  were  led  to  individual  thought  and  investigation, 
and  Oriental  submission  and  stagnation  were  replaced  by  action 
and  change.  Law  as  divinely  sanctioned  custom  gave  way  to  law 
asjjgjvjlLQJLthe  state,  although  the  Greeks  never 


from  the  feeling  that  the  source  of  law  was  in  natural  reason,  to  be 
discovered  rather  than  created  by  man.  The  state  -was  viewed  as 
the  highest  form  of  life,  indirectly  divine  or  "  natural  "  in  origin  ; 
and  all  interests  of  the  individual,  moral  and  intellectual  as  well  as 
political,  were  subordinated  to  its  welfare.  Statejmd  government 
were  not  distinguished,  neither  did  a  clear  line  separate  public  and 
private  affairs.  Since  the  Greeks  viewed  the  state  as  the  perfect 
whole,  of  which  each  individual  formed  a  part,  a  logical  corollary  led 
to  their  doctrine  that  each  citizen  should  share  in  political  rights. 
This  democratic  idea  was  aided  by  the  small  size  of  their  units  ; 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  75 

and  in  turn  the  Greek  belief  that  all  citizens  should  take  part  in 
government  maintained  the  city  state,  limited  as  to  territory  and 
population,  as  their  ideal.  The  wide  interests  that  civic  life  in- 
.  eluded  within  these  small  units  created  remarkable  energy  and 
keen  thinking  in  politics.  However,  the  peculiar  circumstances 
under  which  the  Greek  states  arose,  prevent  an  extensive  appli- 
cation of  their  political  principles  to  modern  conditions.  These 
included : l 

1.  The  universal  existence  and  public  recognition  of  slavery, 
affecting  ideas  of  both  political  rights  and  personal  liberty. 

2.  The  small  sjz&.of  the  states,  preventing  development  of  rep- 
resentation or  extended  administration. 

3.  The  absence  of  modern  complicated  industrial  problems. 

4.  The  absence  ot  any  provision  for  local  government  or  gov- 
ernment of  dependencies. 

In  the  philosophical  speculations  of  Plato,2  and  esoecially  in  the 
more  practical  system  of  Aristotle,3  based  on  history  and  observa- 
tion, may  be  found  the  best  statements  of  Greek  political  theory. 
C_l  Although  the  Romans  were  not  a  speculative  people,  and  took 
their  philosophy,  with  little  modification,  from  the  Greeks,  yet  in 
their  actual  system  of  law  and  government  they  worked  out  prin- 
ciples that  made  a  distinct  contribution  to  political  theory.  They 
developed  the  idea  of  positive  law,  distinct  from  religious  and 
moral  sanction-  They  conceived  the  state  as  a  legal  person,  with 
sovereign  power  resting  in  the  Roman  citizens  ;  and  to  them  sov- 
ereignty meant  authority  in  legislation  as  well  as  in  administration. 
Besides,  citizens  possessed  rights  againstjother  citizens^and  against 
the  government,  and  an  elaborate  system  of  jurisprudence  was  de- 
veloped. Like  the  Greeks  they  considered  the  state  as  "  natural " 
and  the  life  of  the  individual  subordinate  to  it ;  yet  as  a  citizen 
the  Roman  also  possessed  definite  legal  rights  whose  protection 
was  the  chief  purpose  of  state  existence.  Finally,  as  a  result  of 
their  conquests,  their  ideal  was  a  world  empire.  Instead  of  the 
city  state,  humanitv  organized  was  their  aim.  In  meeting  the  prac- 
tical difficulties  oradministration  over  great  areas^in  the  impartial 

1  Amos,  The  Science  of  Politics,  pp.  24-30. 

2  Republic  ;  Statesman  ;  Laws.  3  Politics ;  Nicomachean  Ethics. 


76  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


pplication  of  uniform  law,  and  in  the  creation  oflocal  organs  of 
government,  the  Romans  not  only  contributed  to  political  prin- 
ciples, but  also  impressed  on  the  thought  of  mankind  a  more 
scientific  view  of  the  proper  conditions  of  good  government.  In 
the  writings  of  Polybius  1  and  Cicero 2  may  be  found  the  best 
statements  of  Roman  political  theory. 

39.  Medieval  political  theory.    In  the  Middle  Ages  two  new 
elements  were  added  to  political  thought  by : 

1.  The    Teutons.    These    conquerors  who  ruled   in   the  West 
brought  in  ideas  of  confident  individualism,  of  local  independence, 
of  participation   in   political  authority.    In  the  feudal  states  that 
arose  as  Teutonic  and  Roman  ideas  mingled,  the  empire  became 
merely  an  ideal,  maintained  more  by  religious  than  political  unity ; 
and  the  form  of  the  state  suffered  from  a  confusion  of  public  with 
private   law.    Sovereignty   became   the   hereditary  possession   of 
families  and  governing  authority  was  based  on  the  holding  of  land. 
While  feudalism  never  really  developed  a  political  theory,  and  was 
in  some  respects  a  retrogression,  it  introduced  elements  needed 
for  further  political  progress.  » 

2.  The  Christian  church.    The  growth  of  the  church  and  its 
organization,  modeled  on  the    Roman   Empire,  the  rise  of  the 
papacy,  the  alliance  with  the  Franks,  and  particularly  the  increased 
temporal  power,  as  the  clergy  became  governing  officials  and  the 
church  a  great  landowner,  were  the  most  important  influences  on 
medieval  political  theory.    Religious  belief  monopolized  the  atten- 
tion of   thinkers  in  the  early  Middle  Ages,  and  when  political 
thinking  revived  it  was  concerned  chiefly  with  the  proper  relation 
of  church  to  state.    In  the  early  church  the  principle  that  its  king- 
dom was  not  of  this  world  was  emphasized,  and  the  spheres  of 
church  and   state  were   carefully  separated.    With  the  union  of 
church  and  state  each  claimed  that  the  other  was  encroaching  on 
its   proper   sphere,    and   rival   theories   arose.    The   papal  party 
claimed  superiority  for  spiritual  power  as  more  directly  conferred 
by_God.    The  supporters  of  imperial  power  also  claimed  direct 
divine  authority  and  demanded  responsibility  to  God  alone.    The 
culmination  of  papal  theory  may  be  found  in  the  writings  of  St. 

1  History  of  Rome.  2  De    Republica ;  De  Legibus ;  De  Officiis. 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  77 

Thomas  Aquinas,1  an  attempt  to  combine  the  philosophy  of  Aris- 
totle with  scholastic  arguments  for  church  supremacy.  With  the 
increasing  study  of  Roman  law  and  the  growth  of  national  states 
actual  facts  no  longer  supported  papal  claims,  and  the  jurists  of 
the  fourteenth  century  did  not  lack  arguments  to  support  the 
absolute  monarchies  then  arising. 

From  about  1350  medieval  issues  declined  and  new  conditions 
led  to  new  theories.  The  national  idea  grew  at  the  expense  of  the 
imperial ;  the  power  of  the  feudal  nobility  declined  ;  and  towns, 
resulting  from  commerce  and  industry,  became  increasingly  im- 
portant. At  the  same  time,  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  the  great 
schism  and  the  conflict  between  the  papal  and  the  conciliar  idea 
weakened  the  authority  of  the  pope  and  led  to  an  examination  of 
religious  authority  in  general.  National  antipapal  revolts  broke 
out  in  several  countries,  and  the  claims  of  the  church  to  political 
power  could  no  longer  be  maintained.  The  writings  of  M^isvpn^ 
which  may  be  viewed  as  closing  medieval  and  opening  modern 
political  thinking,  indicated  the  new  mental  attitude  and  the  new 
''questions  at  issue.  Morality  and  religion  were  relegated  to  an  in- 
significant, position.  The  historical  method  replaced  scholastic 
dogma.  Men  were  viewed  as  essentially  selfish  ;  the  state  rested 
on  force,  and  material  prosperity  was  its  conscious  aim.  In  bring- 
ing theory  again  in  touch  with  actual  conditions  a  most  powerful 
blow  was  struck  at  medieval  method.  Finally,  in  his  distinction 
between  public  and  private,!?!^!^  his  justification  of  ronqnpst, 
and  his  recognition  of  nationality,  Machiavelli^  anticipated-essen- 
tialhzL  modern  ideas.^ 

40.  Modern  political  theory.  In  discussing  political  theory  since 
the  Reformation  it  will  be  advisable  first  to  trace  the  general  de- 
velopment of  political  ideas  in  their  relation  to  actual  state  evolu- 
tion during  this  period  ;  then  to  view  in  more  detail  those  theories 
that  have  most  influenced  present  political  conditions.  At  the 
opening  of  the  modern  period  interest  centered  around  the  Pjoles- 
tagtJiefei^najiQji.  Beginning  as  a  religious  movement,  it  became 
increasingly  political  Jn_jiature.  and  the  doctrines  of  its  leaders, 
especially  of .  Cglyjn^2  inflnppreH  the  theory  of  the  state.  The 

1  Be  Regimine  Principum.  2  Institutes,  Bk.  IV. 


78  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

relation  of  church  to  state  was  still  the  great  problem.  In  essence 
the  reformers  returned  to  the  doctrine  of  two  powers,  church  and 
state,  distinct  in  function  but  both  resting  on  divine  sanction. 
They  strengthened  the  growing  national  idea  by  attacking  the  con- 
cepts  of  universal  church  and  universal __empirpj  but  they_also 
strengthened  the  authority  of  rulers  by  their  doctrine  of  divine 
right.  In  contrast  to  Machiavelli  their  theories  were  medieval  and 
scholastic,  but  in  the  teachings  of  Calvin,  as  applied  later  by  his 
followers  in  France,  the  Netherlands,  and  England,  the  way  was 
prepared  for  liberty.  As  God's  choseji_j2eiipl£_lh£y  had  certain- 
rights  secure  from  temporal  authority,  and  passive  submission  was 
not  demanded  if  jnonarchs  yio1ated_th^hig;her  law  of  nature 

The  century  following  the  Reformation  was  marked  by  civil  and 
external  wars  based  on  religious  differences,  and  in  this  process 
absolutism  in  government  was  seriously  attacked.  The  idea  that 
authority  resulted  from  a  covenant  between  ruler  and  subjects,  and 
that  tyrants  should  be  resisted,  gained  ground  in  the  writings  of 
Catholics  and  Protestants  alike.  The  state  thus  rested  on  human 
rather  than  divine  sanction,  and  ideas_pf  naturallaw  and  popular 
sovereignty,  familiar  in  ancient  theory,  were  revived.  Toward  the 
end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  in  the  writings  of  Bodin,1  the  first 
complete  system  of  politics  since  Aristotle,  based  ^rT  history  and 
observation,  appeared  ;  and  early  in  the  seventeenth  century,  in 
the  work  of  Grotius,2  the  basis  was  laid  for  international  law. 
Since  that  time  political  thought  has  been  dominated  by  a  growing 
interest  in  democratic  principles.  The  older  divine-right  theory 
was  replaced  by  that  of  the  "social  contract,"  which  served  in  turn 
as  the  basis  for  absolute  monarchy,  limited  monarchy,  and  de- 
mocracy. The  idea  of  popular  jynvernrneni-  was  added  to  that  of 
popular  sovereignty ,y^ndthe  relation  of  state  to  individual  de- 
manded new  adjustment.  Ideas  as  to  the  proper  scope  of  state 
activity  underwent  great  change,  and  international  regulation  be- 
came more  extensive  and  uniform.  The  influence  of  external 
environment  was  increasingly  appreciated,  and,  in  the  nineteenth 
century,  political  theory  was  affected  by  the  doctrine  of  biologic 
evolution.  Finally,  in  the  works  of  Austin,  Maine,  and  numerous 

1  De  Republica  Libri  Sex.  2  De  Jure  Belli  ac  P 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE 


79 


recent  scholars,  the  present  principles  of  political  theory  were 
worked  out. 

In  modern  political  thought  several  theories  attempting  a 
rational  justification  of  state  authority  may  be  noted.  Among  the 
minor  ones  are  : 

I.  The  force  theory.  This  theory  finds  the  origin  of  the  state 
in  the  subordination  of  the  weak  to  the  strong ;  it  tracesstate  de- 
.velopment  as  the  result  ot  conquest  'and  justifies  its  authority  by 
the  proposition  that  might  is  right.  In  the  medieval  period  the 
church  fathers  urged  this  theory,  emphasizing  the  evil  nature  of 
political  power,  so  that  the  authority  of  the  church  might  be  en- 
larged. In  the  last  century  the  Individualist  School  adopted  this 
point  of  view  in  their  desire  to  protect  individual  liberty  against 
governmental  encroachment.  It  also  underlies  the  political  theory 
of  socialism,  which  views  modern  governments  as  the  outgrowth 
of  at  system  of  aggression  by  which  the  rights  of  many  have  been 
sacrificecTto  the  might  of  a  few.  In  the  reaction  against  the  popu- 
lar-sovereignty theory  of  the"  French  Revolution,  a  modified  form 
of  this  doctrine  appeared  in  the  "  patrimonial  theory  "  of  Ludwig 
von  Haller,  which  supported  monarchy  by  the  argument  that 
obedience  was  the  naturddin:yo^^ 

authority  and  protection  that .oLthe  strom 
i*^  ^^^L^^^J\^^-^^ 

.n  so  far  as  this  theory  aims  to  explain  state  origin  and  develop- 
ment it  contains  an  important  element  of  truth,  since  conquest  was 
one  of  thejnosJ:  powerlul_forcegjji  state-building^jmd  the^over- 
eignty  of  the  stare  always  rests  ultimately  on  force.  It  makesjhe 
mistake,  however,  of  neglecting  other  contributory  influences.  As 
a  justification  of  state  authority,  the  doctrine  that  might  makes 
right  scarcely  needs  refutation.  Obedience  to  force  is  an  act  of 
necessity,  not  of  duty,  since,  where  no  free  choice  exists,  morality 
is  absent.  Obedience  that  is  due  only  so  long  as  disobedience  is 
impossible  scarcely  justifies  state  existence. 

~~2.  The  utilitarian  theory.  This  doctrine,  related  to  the  develop- 
ment of  English  economic  theory,  explains  the  state  on  the  basis 
of  its  obvious  usefulness.  Justifi€s-4to  authority  on  the  basis  of_ 
necessity,  and  sets  as  its  ideal  the  greatest  goo,d..  PJL tne  greatest 
number.  A  clear  statement  of  this  point  of  view  is  found  in 


8o  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Bentham's  "  Fragment  on  Government."  While  containing  impor- 
tant elements  of  truth  in  its  statement  of  the  ideal  that  aims  to 
reconcile  individual  and  social  welfare,  this  theory  scarcely  touches 
the  real  problem.  The  usefulness  of  the  state,  while  indicating 
the  reason,  does  not  explain  the  method,  by  which  it  came  into 
existence ;  neither  does  it  explain  by  what  right  certain  persons 
exercise  authority  over  others.  Besides,  in  practical  application, 
attempts  to  secure  the  greatest  general  welfare  open  endless  dis- 
putes as  to  state  function. 

In  addition  to  these  partial  explanations  three  other  theories, 
because  of  their  prominence  in  the  history  of  political  ideas, 
deserve  more  particular  attention  : 

1.  The  divine  theory 

2.  The  social-contract  theory 

3.  The  organic  theory 

41.  The  divine  theory.  The  theory  that  the  state  is  a  divine 
creation  is  as  old  as  the  state  itself.  In  the  early  Oriental  empires 
religious  and  political  ideas  were  not  separated.  The  sanction  of 
law  and  the  authority  of  rulers  came  from  the  gods.  In  the  He- 
brew theocracy  it  was  believed  not  only  that  God  was  the  source 
of  authority,  but  that  he  continued  to  take  a  direct  part  in  govern- 
ment. Among  the  Greeks  and  Romans  the  state,  as  a  natural 
manifestation  of  man's  political  instincts,  was  considered  indirectly 
divine,  and  religious  ideas  remained ;  although  in  practice  the 
Romans  maintained  that  law  and  government  were  human  crea- 
tions, resting  on  human  sanction.  However,  it  was  not  until  the 
medieval  conflict  between  papacy  and  empire  broke  ouLthat  the 
divine  theory  was  formulated. 

As  the  church,  at  first  a  spiritual  organization  alone,  gradually 
exercised  more  temporal  power  a  dispute  arose  as  to  whether 
governing  authority,  which  all  agreed  came  from  God,  had  been 
directly  bestowed  upon  emperor  or  upon  pope.  Toward  the  close 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  when  the  growing  national  states  and  the 
Reformation  had  removed  the  papacy  as  an  important  rival  in 
political  power,  the  question  was  revived  in  the  contest  between 
king  and  people.  The  old  doctrine  that  authority  came  from  God 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  8 1 

became  valuable  to  support  royal  power  against  the  growing  political 
consciousness  of  the  masses.  During  the  seventeenth  century  the 
divine-riff  ht  theory  aimed  not  only  to  justify  political  authority  in 
general,  but  more  especially  tolegitimjzejhal  of  ^Y1'sting  mlers  ^s 
representatives  of  God.  The  monarchs  of  that  time  claimed  ab- 
solute and  irresponsible  power,  on  the  ground  that  they  were 
ordained  of  God  to  exercise  authority  divine  in  origin.  In  the 
writings  of  James  I  of  England,  and  in  Sir  Robert  Filmer's 
"  Patriarcha,"  may  be  found  the  extreme  statement  of  this  theory. 
The  rise  of  democracy,  and  the  "  social-contract "  theory  on  which 
it  is  based,  displaced  the  divine-right  theory,  although  traces  of  its 
influence  may  still  be  observed  in  some  European  states. 

To-day  the  theory,  in  spite  of  its  historic  importance,  scarcely 
needs  serious  consideration.    It  served  as  a  sanction  for  authority 
a^a_jime  when  obedienrp  and  HisHplinp,  rnrhfr  thnn  freedom,  were 
needed.'-'  It«  taught  men  to  obey  when  they  were  not  yet  ready  to 
govern  themselves.    In  present  political  theory,  however,  it  has  no 
place.    Whatever  may  be  the  ultimate  source  of  power  or  of  human  ^ 
nature,  the  state  is  a  human  institution  :  its  laws  are  created  by  ^ 
men  and  enforced   by  them.    Divine  or  moral  law  deals  with  >* 
motives  ;  the  state  deals  with  external  actions ;  and  it  is  quite 
possible  for  moral  and  legal  obligations  to  be  contradictory.   At  all 
events,  since  their  sanction  is  fundamentally  different,  it  is  the 
latter  alone  with  which  political  science  deals. 

42.  The  social-contract  theory.  This  theory,  the  most  impor- 
tant, in  its  influence  on  political  thought,  of  the  various  attempts  to 
explain  the  origin  and  justification  of  the  state,  may  be  considered 
under  the  following  topics  : 

1.  Nature  of  the  theory 

2.  Historic  development  of  the  theory    y 

3.  Criticism  of  the  theory 

I .  The  nature  of  the  theory.  The  social-contract  theory  contains 
three  essential  elements  : 

(a)  The  "  state  of  nature"  and  "natural  law."  It  conceives  an 
original,  nonpolitical  life  of  mankind  before  government  was  insti- 
tuted, called  the  state  of  nature.  During  this  period  man  obeyed 


82  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

no  laws  of  human  enforcement,  but  was  subject  only  to  regulations 
or  general  principles  inherent  in  nature  itself.  Under  this  "natu- 
ral law"  every  man  possessed  "natural  rights." 

(b)  The  political  compact.    This  state  of  nature,  either  because 
it  was  an  ideal  condition  too  good  to  last,  or  because  from  the 
beginning  it  was  a  condition  of  selfish  aggression,  soon  became 

\  unbearable.  y3y  agreement  men  formed  themselves  into  political 
bodies,  giving  up  their  natural  rights  in  return  for  comrnoa  pro- 
tection^ Natural  law  was  replaced  by  the~Iaw  of  the  state^which, 
enforced  by  all,  created  mutual  rights  and  duties.  This  political 
compact,  if  considered  as  an  actual  historic  fact,  explained  the 
origin  of  the  state ;  if  not,  it  served  as  an  interpretation  of  the 
nature  of  political  authority. 

(c)  The    governmental  compact.    In  addition  to  the  political 
compact  by  which  an  aggregate  of  individuals  formed  themselves 
into  a  body  politic,  a  further  agreement  was  necessary  between 
rulers  and  subjects,  according  to  which  a  government  was  created 
and_authority  placed  in  particular  hands.    This  governmental  com- 
pact determined  the  legitimacy  of  existing  government  and  the 
extent  of  its  power. 

This  in  brief  is  the  social-contract  theory.  It  is  essentially  in- 
dividualistic,  viewing  the  state  as  the  deliberate_creation  of  man, 
.  who,  even  before  its  existence,  possessed  natural  rights ;  and  the 
authority  of  government  as  resting  ultimately  on  fhlT  consent  of 
the  governed.  The  importance  of  the  theory  and  the  various  forms 
it  has  taken  may  best  be  appreciated  by  a  brief  survey  of  its  his- 
toric growth. 

2.  Historic  development  of  the  theory.  The  idea  of  natural  law 
was  first  worked  out  by  the  Greek  philosophers.  Previously  all 
law  was  considered  as  divine  in  origin  and  sanction.  Gradually, 


t  .  especially  in  the  system  of  the^  Stoics,  arose  the  belief  ^y 

universal  law  of  nature  to  which  human  law  tended  to  conform  ; 
and  this  idea  was  incorporated  in  Roman  jurisprudence.  In  the 
theory  of  the  Christian  church  the  state  of  nature  was  identified 
with  the  ideal  condition  prevailing  bef ore \^dam!s .fall,  and  the 
state  was  therefore,  because  of  human  sin,  a  necessary  evil.  After 
the  Renaissance  human  and  divine  sanctions  were  more  clearly 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  83 

separated,  and,  as  indicated,  natural  law  served  as  the  basis  for  the 
social-contract  theory.  To  this  day  a  general  belief  in  the  inalien- 
able  rights  of  manshows  surviving  traces  of  this  doctrine.  As  will 
be~seen  later/  it  also  "influenced  the  beginnings  of  international  law. 

The  idea  that  governmental  authority  is  based  on  a  compact 
between  rulers  and  subjects  is  also  of  ancient  origin.  Prevalent 
among  the  Hebrews,2  suggested  by  Plato,3  and  universally  accepted 
by  Roman  jurists  under  the  Empire,  it  also  formed  the  basis  for 
the  whole  system  of  feudalism.  During  the  contest  between 
emperor  and  pope,  church  writers,  attacking  the  exalted  claims  of 
the  emperor,  held  that  all  civil  rulers  received  their  authority  by 
means  of  a  covenant  with  the  people.  Later,  practically  all  thinkers 
agreed  that  ultimate  authority  lay  in  the  people,  and  that  by  con- 
tract they  had  transferred  this  power  to  their  rulers.  A  difference 
of  opinion  arose,  however,  as  to  the  nature  of  this  compact ;  some 
viewing  it  as  an  irrevocable  surrender,  others  as  a  delegation  of 
authority  liable  to  withdrawal  if  abused.  In  this  form,  it  became 
a  part  of  the  general  social-contract  theory,  and  influenced  the 
distinction  between  state  and  government  and  the  growth  of 
democracy. 

The  more  general  theory  that  viewed  the  origin  of  the  state  as 
the  result  of  a  political  compact  did  not  arise  until  the  seventeenth 
century.  Previously  the  state  had  been  considered  as,  directly  or 
indirectly,  the  work  of  God.  In  the  writings  of  Richard  Hooker  4 
in  England,  and  Johannes  Althusius  5  on  the  continent,  the  theory 
was  first  outlined,  and  was  soon  after  incorporated  into  the  great 
work  of  Grotius.  The  logical  development  of  the  theory,  how- 
ever, was  carried  out  by  Hobbes 6  and  Locke  7  in  England,  and 
by  Rousseau 8  in  France,  and  their  work  needs  more  detailed 
consideration. 

(a)  Hobbes 's  theory  may  be  stated  as  follows  :  Man  being  essen- 
tially selfish,  the  state  of  nature  was  one  of  war.  During  this  time 
no  legal  rights  existed,  —  only  natural  rights,  based  on  utility  and 

1  See  Chapter  XI.  2  2  Samuel  v.  3. 

3  Republic,  p.  359;  Crito,  p.  51  (Jowett's  translation). 

4  Ecclesiastical  Polity.        6  Politica  Methodice  Digesta,  etc.        6  Leviathan. 
7  Two  Treatises  of  Government.  8  The  Social  Contract. 


84  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

reason.  To  escape  the  constant  fear  and  danger  of  this  condition, 
men  agreed  to  submit  themselves  to  a  common  authority.  The 
power  thus  created  by  uniting  the  natural  rights  of  all^was  the 
sovereign.  The  contract  once  made,  the  authority  of  the  sovereign 
was  absolute.  Since  he  was  no  party  to  the  contract,  he  could  not 
break  it,  neither  could  the  people  withdraw  rights  which  they  had 
irrevocably  transferred.  Obedience  was  necessary,  no  matter  how 
the  sovereign  exercised  his  power,  and  the  right  of  revolution  was 
forever  gone. 

Hobbes,  writing  at  the  time  of  the  civil  war  in  England,  used 
his  theory  to  uphold  the  absolutism  of  the  Stuarts.  Divine  right 
could  no  longer  be  seriously  urged,  and  a  new  theory  was  needed 
to  reconcile  absolute  monarchy  with  the  growing  belief  that  ultimate 
political  power  resided  in  the  people.  Aside  from  the  fundamental 
fallacies  inherent  in  the  doctrine  of  natural  rights,  to  be  considered 
later,1  Hobbes's  chief  defect  was  the  failure  to  distinguish  between 
state  and  government.  He  did  not  realize  that  the  form  of  govern- 
ment may  be  Changed  without  destroying  the  state,  amjjHaLgx- 
istence  of  sovereign  power  does  not  necessarily  mean  thejibsolute 
authority  of  the  particular  persons jvh<3  exercise  it. 

(br^ocKe^^irYered  from  Hobbesin  several  respects.  He  con- 
ceived thestate  of  nature  to  be  one  of  equality  and  freedom.  It 
was,  however,  unsatisfactory  because  of  difficulty  in  interpreting 
and  enforcing  natural  law.  Men  therefore  agreed  to  give  up  cer- 
tain of  their  natural  rights  to  a  common  authority,  and  by  this 
means  protect  their  remaining  rights.  To  this_.contn^thej:uler 
also  was  a  party  and  to  its  terms  was  equally  bound.  If  rulers 
failed  to  maintain  those  individual  rights  for  whose  protection  they 
had  been  established._the  contract  was  dissolved^  alJcTffie^people. 
resifflrin^'trlelroriginal  liberty,  might  set  up  a  new  government. 
In  thiSTform  the  doctrine  was  made  the  basis  of  limited  monarchy, 
Locke  writing  to  uphold  the  Revolution  of  1688,  by  which  a  king 
was  deposed  and  a  new  king  created.  The  chief  contribution  of 
Locke  was  his  recognition  of  the  limited  powers  of  government, 
his  theory  serving  as  a  basis  tor  revolutiorrand  democrat 


failed,  however,  sufficiently  to~distinguish  between  moral  and  civil 

1  See  section  54. 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  85 

laws  ;  and  he  did  not  clearly  see  that  revolution,  however  desirable, 
is  never  legal. 

(c)  By  Rousseau  the  theory  of  natural  rights  was  carried  still 
further.  The  state  of  nature  was  conceived  as  a  condition  of  ideal 
bappiness^^oniy^jibandoned  because  growing  population  ar>^  $A- 
vancing^civilization  brought  evils.  Men  were  thus  compelled  to 
form  a  social  contract  by  which  each  merged  his  natural  rights  into 
a  common  authority  or  general  will.  To  this  contract  the  govern- 
ment was  (not/a  party.  Final  authority  always  remained  in  the 
hands  of  the  people,  and  the  government  was  viewed  merely  as 
the  executive  agent  to  carry  out  the  general  will.  Even  repre- 
sentative government  was  considered  an  evil, 
assembly  being  j-hp  tme  soverein. 


This  theory,  emphasizing  popular  sovereignty,  naturally  served  as 
the  basis  for  democracy  and  supported  the  revolutions  of  the  eight- 
eenth century.  It  clearly  distinguished  state  and  government^aiid 
pointed  out  the  delegated  authority  ot'  the  latter  However,  it  prac- 
tically destroyed  the  legal  nature  of  authority  by  making  it  identical 
with  public  opinion,  and  by  placing  the  permanence  and  sanction 
of  government  at  the  mercy  of  a  rather  indefinite  general  will. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  general  princi- 
ples of  the  social-contract  theory  exerted  considerable  influence  on 
the  continent  and  were  particularly  powerful  in  America,  where 
they  are  to  be  found  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence  and 
in  the  bills  of  rights  included  in  almost  all  the  written  constitu- 
tions. In  the  writings  of  the  statesmen  of  this  period,  especially 
of  Jefferson  and  Madison,  its  doctrines  were  expressed,  and  to  this 
day  many  of  them  remain  unconsciously  at  the  basis  of  American 
political  thought. 

3.  Criticism  of  the  theory.  In  spite  of  the  great  value  of  this 
theory  in  serving  as  the  basis  for  modern  democracy,  and  in  spite 
of  its  elements  of  truth  in  emphasizing  the  importance  of  the 
individual,  the  possibility  of  modifying  political  institutions  by 
direct  human  effort,  and  the  fact  that  ultimate  political  authority 
lies,  at  least  potentially,  in  the  people,  the  fundamental  principles 
upon  which  the  theory  is  based  are  incorrect.  These  may  be 
criticized  on  the  following  grounds  : 


86  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

(a)  Historical.    It  is  a  manifest  absurdity  to  suppose  that  people 
in  the  earliest  stages  of  civilization,  without;  previous  pvppnVnrp  in 
government,  should  deliberately  agree  to  form  a  political  organiza- 
tion.   Besides,  our  knowledge  of  the  beginnings  of  organized  life 
showsjthat  the  individuaLaas_of  little  importance^The  family  was 
the  unit,  property  was  held  in  common,  custom  formed  law,  and 
each  man  was  born  into  his  status  in  society.    Under  such  con- 
ditions free  contracting  on  the  part  of  individuals  would  be  out 
of  the  question.    Examples  of  people,  familiar  with  political  ideas, 
deliberately  forming  new  organizations  may  be  given,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Mayflowey  compact  of  j[62O^or  even  of  the  United 
States  Constitution  ;  but  no  record  exists  of  a  people,  formerly 
ignorant  of  political  institutions,  contracting  to  form  a  state. 

(b)  Legal.    It  is  evident  that  such  contracts  could  have  no  legal 
force.    Since  no  political  organization  existed  to  define  andjenforce 
contract  rights,  the  o_riginaL_agrfem^nt  by  whiVh  th^  state  was 
formed/wojoldjiot  be  legally,binding.    Further  contracts  based  upon 
it  would  consequently  be  invalid,  and  all  rights  would  be  without 
legal  foundation. 

(c)  Rational.    It  is  not  sufficient  to  show  that  this  theory  is  a 
historical  and  legal  impossibility,  since  its  chief  purpose  is  rather 
a  philosophical  attempt  to  justify  the  apparent  contradiction  be- 
tween   political    authority   and    individual    freedom.    Even    as   a 
rational  analysis,  however,  this  theory  can  no  longer  be  upheld. 
The  relation  of  the  individual  to  the  state  isjnnt  ^  voluntary 
since  man  is  born  into  the  <;tate  and  ^nn^t  av^H  its  ^ig 


Neither  does  the  contract  idea  of  an  exchange  of  obedience  for 
protection  express  the  proper  relation  of  man  and  state.  Care  of 
the  poor  and  helpless  and  provision  for  the  welfare  of  future  gen- 
erations, both  important  functions  of  all  modern  states,  cannot  be 
justified  on  these  grounds.  Finally,  the  fundamental  basis  of  the 
theory,  the  conception  of  natural  "  laws  "  and  "rights,"  is  fal- 
lacious. The  nature  of  law  and  of  rights  will  be  discussed  more 
fully  in  a  later  chapter  ;  1  for  the  present  it  will  suffice  to  point 
out  that  a  right  is  a  privilege  emphasizing  corresponding  obli- 
gations on  the  part  of  others,  and  is  valuable  only  in  case  some 

1  See  Chapter  X. 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  87 

authority  exists  to  maintain  the  right  by  enforcing  the  obligations. 
In  a  state  of  nature  man  would  possess  only  powers,  and  his 
natural  "  rights  "  would  constantly  conflict  with  those  of  others, 
thus  destroying  the  "  rights  "  of  ^11  ^vr^pj-j-v^  strongest.  It  was, 
then,  not  until  a  definite  political  authority  existed,  strong  enough 
to  compel  every  individual  to  refrain  from  interference  withLQthers. 
that  lawjor  rights_c_ame  into  being.  In  other  words,  liberty  js_pns-_ 
sibleonly  under  authority^  No  law  or  rights,  except  in  a  purely 
efEical  sense,  existed  before  the  state  arose. 

43.  The  organic  theory.  This  theory  attempts  to  remove  the  ' 
conflict  between  state  and  individual  by  merging  them  into  one 
organism.  Its  chief  features  may  be  outlined  as  follows  :  Meji_are 
by_jiatu£e^jp^l ideal  beings/'  and  their  universal  tendency  to  social 
organization  creates  _the  state.  This  forms  the  highest  natural 
organism,  like  plants  and_  animals- subject  to  the  usual  laws  of 
development,  decay,  and_death1__Indiyjduals  whose  existence  is 
merge^jrl  that  of  the  state  are  the  basic  cells  of  which  the_organ- 
ism  is  composed.  The  various"  departments  of  government  cor- 
respond to  the  organs  of  living  beings,  specialized  in  function  and 
modified  by  changing  conditions.  Like  other  natural  organisms, 
the  state  develops  in  its  environment,  its  organs  becoming  more 
distinct  and  definite,  and  at  the  same  time  more  closely  interrelated. 
The_£tat@-ka&-Jx>th  a  physical  and  a  psychic  nature.  It  feels,  it 
wills,  it  acts  ;  it  is  the  highest  form  of  organized  life,  —  a  sort 
of  magnified  person. 

In  the  political  theory  of  the  Greeks  may  be  traced  the  begin- 
nings of  this  point  of  view.  They  considered  political  life  as 
inherent  in  nature,  and  subordinated  individual  to  state.  It  was 
not,  however,  until  the  biologic  theory  of  evolution  was  established 
that  these  ideas  were  expanded  to  their  logical  conclusion.  Since 
the  middle  of  the  last  century  this  theory,  especially  in  Germany, 
has  played  a  considerable  part  in  social  philosophy  ;  and  certain 
writers1  have  worked  out  elaborate  and  ingenious  comparisons 
between  the  state  and  living  organisms,  tracing  identity  even  in 
the  detailed  functions  of  political  and  biologic  life. 

1  Spencer,  Principles  of  Sociology,  Part  II. 
Schaffle,  Bau  und  Leben  des  socialen  Korpers. 


88  INTRODUCTION  TO 'POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Viewed  merely  as  an  analogy,  this  theory  brings  out  many  strik- 
ing similarities  in  structure  and  in  method  of  growth,  and  empha- 
sizes the  unity, and  continuous  evolution  of  the  state.  It  is  thus  a 
valuable  reaction  against,  the  extreme  individualism  of  the  social- 
contract  theory.  It  is  of  course  true  that  the  state  is  natural  in  the 
sense  that  everything  that  exists  is  natural ;  but  this  explains 
neither  its  origin,  rior  its  nature,  nor  its  purpose,  and  is  no  justi- 
fication for  its  authority  over  those  who  do  not  possess  the  polit- 
ical instinct.  Furthermore,  a  number  of  objections  arise  to  a  literal 
acceptance  of  the  state  as  an  organism,  and  these  objections  are 
fundamental. 

1.  The  state  has  life,  sensation,  and  thought_only  through  its 
units,  —  individuals  ;  the  animal  organism  has  one  life,  sensorium, 
and  brain,  and  its  cells  have  no  individual  life  or  volition.    Men 
have  life  and  interests  outside  the  state,  and  at  most  only  their 
conduct  and  not  their  motives  are  subject  to  its  control.    The 
organization  of  the  state  may  be  radically  changed,  and  its  parts  are 
in  many  respects  independent.    Moreover,  state  development  has 
been  chiefly  marked  by  the  widening  sphere  of  freedom  that  it  has 
created  for  its  members.    On  the  other  hand,  in  the  organism  the 
life  of  the  parts  is  completely  merged  in  that  of  the  whole,  and, 
in  every  respect,  development  increases  the  control  of  the  whole 
over  its  units. 

2.  All  natural  organisms,  by  various  processes,  owe  their  origin 
to  preexisting_organisms,  deriving  from  them  their  life  and  their 
fundamental  characteristics.    The  life  of  the  state,  however,  comes 
from  within,  and  cannot  be  derived  from  any  other  political  organ- 
ization. 

3.  The  organism  grows  unconsciously,  independent  of  volition, 
entirely  dependent  upon  its  environment  and  the  natural  laws  of 
the  biologic  world.   The  state,  while  influenced  by  external  con- 
ditions, reaches  a  point  in  its  development  where  men,  realizing 
their  organized  existence,  deliberately  direct  and  modify  its  forms 
and  functions. 

In  a  literal  sense,  therefore,  the  state  is  not-  an  organism.  More- 
over, this  theory  throws  little  light  on  the  practical  question  of 
what  the  state  should  do.  In  emphasizing  the  fact  that  the  state 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  89 

results  from  natural  growth,  it  can  scarcely  mean  that  men  in  the 
state  are  to  take  merely  a  passive  part  in  this  process.  In  fact^ 
this  theory  has  been  used  to  support  views  on  state  function  rang- 
ing from  individualism  to  socialism.  According  to  Spencer,  gov- 
ernment has  been  evolved  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  peace 
and  order,  and  of  giving  protection  to  its  citizens ;  and,  like  other 
organs,  it  should  limit  its_activities  to  those  particular  Junctions  for 
which  it  arose.  According  to  many  German  writers,  Bluntschli 
for  instance,  the  state,  as  the  highest  organism,  is  the  important 
unit,  and  collective  activity  is  the  ideal  of  social  progress.  There- 
fore, in  spite  of  the  valuable  truths  which  this  theory  contains,, in 
emphasizing  the  historic  origin  and  continuous  evolution  of  the 
state,  it  can  be  considered  neither  a  satisfactory  explanation  of 
stateexistenc^nor  a  trustworthy  guide  to  state  activity. 

4?r~Present  political  theory.  There  still  remains  to  be  con- 
sidered the  theory  of  the  state  held  by  the  majority  of  present-day 
thinkers.  As  this  has  already  been  indicated,  and  will  be  more 
fully  developed  in  the  progress  of  this  volume,  only  a  brief  sum- 
mary will  at  this  point  be  given. 

1.  As  to  the  origin  of  the  state.    The   modern   historical  or 
evolutionary  theory  of  state  origin  considers  the  state  neither  as 
divinely  created  nor  as  the  deliberate  work  of  man.    It  sees  the 
state,  like  other  social  institutions,  coming  into  existence  uncon- 
sciously, at  various  times  and  in  different  ways^  as  the  result_oiLa 
processjxf  n^hiral^e volution^  The  life  of  men  in  association,  their 
bonds  of  kinship  and  religion,  the  need  for  regulation  in  securing 
order  and  protection,  —  these  created  organization  and  authority, 
the  crude  beginnings  of  the  state.    By  gradual  evolution  under 
changing  conditions  political  life  became  more  definite  and  more 
universal.    Men  learned  first  to  obey,  then  to  govern  themselves. 
Unconscious  development  gave  way  to  conscious  "progress,  and 
state^growth^jnfluenced  byexternal  conditions,  by  changes  in  other 
institutions,  and  by  theefforts~ol  individuaIsi_jQnned  part  of.  the 
gxiaFwor^  man. 

2.  As  to  the  nature  of  the  state.    Modern  theory  views  the  state 
as  the  outward  organized  manifestation  of  a  conscious  spirit  of 
political  unity.    Geographic  causes,  common  interests,  the  feeling 


90  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

of  nationality,  and  political  expediency  are  among  the  causes  that 
create  this  unity,  or  general  will,  as  it  may  be  called,  and  when  it 
is  outwardly  realized  in  the  creation  of  government,  a  state  exists. 
Since  natural  rights  are  impossible,  and  the  state,  instead  of 
destroying,  creates  and  maintains  liberty,  it  needs  no  moral  justifi- 
cation. The  method  by  which  its  powers  shall  be  exercised  and 
the  proper  extent  of  its  activity  are  still  unsettled  problems." 

The  state  is  thus  a  le^gal  person .  It  expresses  its  will  in  the 
form  of  law,  it  determines  its  relations  to  other  states,  it  creates 
a  government  and  outlines  its  powers,  and  it  adjusts  the  mutual 
rights  and  obligations  of  its  citizens.  According  to  this  point  of 
view,  the  essenc^  of  the  state  is  its  sovereign ty.  —absolute  internal 
authority  over  all  its  individuals  and  absolute  external  independence 
from  the  interference  of  other  states.  States  are  viewed  as  legally 
equal,  each  having  jurisdiction  over  its  own  territory  ;  and,  in  their 
dealings  with  one  another,  having  mutual  rights  and  duties. 

It  is  in  the  relation  of  states  to  one  another  that  present  theory 
finds  greatest  difficulties.  Protectorates,  spheres  of  influence,  suze- 
rainty, and  other  complicated  forms  of  association  make  a  practical 
application  of  the  theory  of  sovereignty  almost  impossible.  Hence 
writers  on  international  law  commonly  speak  of  semisovereign 
states,  and  consider  independence  as  essentially  relative  in  its 
nature.  It  may  be  noted,  however,  that  the  indivisible,  absolute 
sovereignty  which  the  state  possesses  over  all  individuals  or  asso- 
ciations within  its  territory  is  a  somewhat  different  concept  from 
the  independence,  never  entirely  complete,  which  states  possess  in 
their  external  relations.1  The  former  is  the  state's  will ;  the  latter 
is  rather  a  collection  of  rights  and  powers.  The  former  cannot  be 
divided,  but  the  latter  may  be  greater  or  less,  depending  upon 
treaty  agreements  and  the  need  for  mutual  concessions  if  states 
are  to  have  dealings  with  one  another.  In  this  sense  the  modern 
theory  of  sovereignty  does  not  mean  that  each  state  is  "  wholly  un- 
limited in  its  relations  with  other  states,  but  that  there  is  no  body  to 
which  effective  control  over  a  sovereign  state  may  be  attributed."  2 
All  states  are  equal  and  independent  in  the  sense  that  they  possess 

1  Crane,  The  State  in  Constitutional  and  International  Law. 

2  Merriam,  History  of  the  Theory  of  Sovereignty  since  Rousseau,  p.  227. 


THEORIES  OF  THE  STATE  91 

an  equal  personality  at  international  law,  capable  of  contracting  or 
repudiating  their  rights  and  obligations.  These,  however,  may  be 
variable,  and  the  relinquishment  or  deprivation  of  certain  of  them 
is  not  regarded  as  a  material  impairment  of  the  independence  or 
sovereignty  of  a  state. 

3.  As  to  the  functions  of  the  state.  On  this  question  the  great- 
est divergence  of  opinion  exists.  Some  would  limit  the  activity  of 
the  state  to  the  mere  maintenance^  of  order  and  security  j  others 
believe  that  state  control  of  all  activities  would  be  beneficial?*  How- 
ever, it  is  safetp  say  that  modern  theory  in  the  main  takes  a 
middle. position.  If.  aims  a.t  snrh  division  of  labor  as  shall  secure 
thebest ^interests  r>f  mankind  and^f_the_jnjiyidud  man._  It  real- 
izes that  the  state  is  by  no  means  an  evil,  and  that  many  things  are 
most  satisfactorily  dealt  with  by  collective  authority.  At  the  same 
time  it  recognizes  the  value  of  individual  initiative  and  rnmpetition. 
and  leaves  to  each  citizen  a  considerable  sphere  of  free  action. 
Without  laying  down  general  rules,  it  deals  with  problems  as  they 
arise,  viewing  them  in  the  light  of  existing  conditions  and  aiming 
to  adjust  with  most  satisfactory  general  results  the  interests  of  the 
individual  and  of  society. 

The  diverse  forms  through  which  political  theory  has  passed, 
and  the  relativity  of  present  political  thought,  indicate  that  no 
theory  of  the  state  can  consider  itself  as  ultimate  truth.  In  the 
past,  political  theory  grew  out  of  actual  conditions  and  of  existing 
methods  of  thought.  A  century  hence  our  present  attitude  toward 
political  problems  may  seem  as  crude  and  absurd  as  the  divine 
right  of  kings  or  the  ideals  of  the  city  state  now  appear. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  VIII 

REFERENCES 

NATURE  OF  SOVEREIGNTY 

1.  INTERNALLY 

2.  EXTERNALLY 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  THEORY  OF  SOVEREIGNTY 
CRITICISM  OF  THEORY  OF  SOVEREIGNTY 

LOCATION  OF  SOVEREIGNTY 

1.  IN  THE  PEOPLE 

2.  IN  THE  CONSTITUTION-AMENDING  ORGAN 

3.  IN  THE  SUM  TOTAL  OF  THE  LAWMAKING  ORGANS 

POPULAR  SOVEREIGNTY 

1.  NATURE  OF  THEORY 

2.  CRITICISM  OF  THEORY 

SOVEREIGNTY  AS  CONSTITUTION-MAKING  POWER 

1.  NATURE  OF  THEORY 

2.  CRITICISM  OF  THEORY 

SOVEREIGNTY  AS  LAWMAKING  POWER 

1.  NATURE  OF  THEORY 

2.  CRITICISM  OF  THEORY 

REVOLUTION 

1.  ANARCHICAL 

2.  CONSTITUTIONAL 

3.  GOVERNMENTAL 


92 


CHAPTER  VIII 
SOVEREIGNTY 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  xi 

AUSTIN,  J.  Lectures  on  Jurisprudence,  Vol.  I,  Lecture  VI 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  VII,  chaps,  i-iv 

BRYCE,  J.  Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence,  Essay  X 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  52-57 

CRANE,  R.  T.  The    State   in  Constitutional   and    International    Law  (J.  H.  U. 

Studies,  Series  XXV,  Nos.  6,  7) 
FREUND,  E.  Empire  and  Sovereignty 

GREEN,  T.  II.  Lectures  on  the  Principles  of  Political  Obligations,  pp.  93-142 
LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  52-70 
LOWELL,  A.  L.  Essays  on  Government,  No.  V 
MAINE,  H.  Early  History  of  Institutions,  chaps,  xii-xiii 
MERRIAM,  C.  E.  History  of  the  Theory  of  Sovereignty  since  Rousseau 
SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chap,  xxxi 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  chaps,  ix,  xi 
WILSON,  W.  The  State,  paragraphs  1445-1448,  1469-1471 

45.  Nature  of  sovereignty.  The  relation  of  state  to  state,  of  a 
state  to  its  citizens,  and  of  one  citizen  to  another'' can  be  under- 
stood only  after  a  further  discussion  of  that  characteristic  which 
distinguishes  the  state  from  all  other  organizations,  — its  sover- 
eignty. Such  discussion  leads  naturally. to  the  correlative  of  state 
sovereignty,  namely,  individual  liberty.  At  first  sight  these  seem 
mutually  contradictory,  but  further  analysis  will  show  their  proper 
relation.  Another  point  to  be  considered  is  the  nature  of  law, 
since  in  that  form  the  sovereignty  of  the  state  manifests  itself. 
These  topics,  therefore,  will  in  turn  form  the  basis  of  the  following 
chapters.1 

The  .  cojic^r^^pj^soj/ereignty  is  the  basis  of  modern  political 
science.  It  underlies  the  validity  of  all  law  and  determines  all  in- 
ternational relations.  It  may  be  briefly  outlined  as  follows :  The 
state  comes  into  being  when  sufficient  spirit  of  unity  exists  to 

i  See  Chapters  IX,  X. 
93 


94 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


organize :apeople,  to  create  a  government,  to  enforce  laws.  In 
order  tomrra  a  "state,  such  an  organized  group  must  be  free  from 
any  limitation^on  its  external  independence.  MoTeover7~it  must 
contain  some  person  or  body  of  persons  whose  commands  receive 
obedience,  and  who  can,  if  necessary,  execute  those  commands 
by  means  of  force.  Such  person  or  body  of  persons  is  the  sover- 
eign, and  its  commands  are  called  laws.  Evidently  there  can  be  no 
legal  limit  to  sovereignty,  since  that  would  imply  a  higher  law- 
making  body,  and  that  in  turn  would  be  the  sovereign.  Such  a 
body  cannot  limit  itself,  since  such  limitations  could  be  removed 
at  its  pleasure.  The  state  therefore  is  legally  sovereign.  There 
can  be  no  legal  limit  to  the  lawmaking  power  of  the  supreme  law- 
making  organization.  Since  sovereignty  is  a  legal  concept,  the 
above  facts  result  inevitably  from  the  definition  of  the  state.  It 
may  be  stated  that,  analyzed  more  closely,  the  state,  in  its  sover- 
eign capacity,  is  : 

i.  Internally.    Absolute  in  authority  over  all  individuals  or  as- 
sociations  of  individuals  within  the  state.    Such  a  thing  as  rights 


against  the  state  is  impossible,  since  the  state  is  the  source  of  all 
rights  and  the  enforcer  of  all  obligations.  "In  so  far  as  the  indi- 
vidual has  claims  upon  his  fellows  to  a  noninterference  on  their 
part  with  the  free  exercise  of  certain  outward  acts,  such  claims 
have  no  legal  force  except  as  recognized  and  enforced  by  the 
political  power."  1  It  must  be  remembered  that  political  science 
deals  with  legal  rights  alone  ;  themoral  question  of  right  or  wrong 
does  not  enter.  Whether  a  law  is  good  or  bad  is  another  question  ; 
the  fact  that  it  is  law  is  sufficient,  and  from  the  legal  standpoint 
the  will  of  the  state  is  absolute.  While  possessing  unlimited  power, 
the  state  usually  exercises  but  a  small  part  of  its  authority.  It  grants 
certain  rights  and  privileges  to  individuals  and  it  voluntarily  sets 
bounds  to  its  own  activities  ;  all  these  have,  however,  no  legal  force 
against  the  state,  since  it  may  change  or  destroy  them  at  its  will. 

When  such  formal  limitations  are  self-imposed  the  state  must 
change  them  in  a  legal  manner,  that  is,  it  must  act  through  its 
proper  organs  and  by  the  method  which  it  prescribed  ;  but  an  un- 
changeable law  is  a  legal  impossibility.  There  have  always  bee  > 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  181. 


SOVEREIGNTY  95 

certain  activities  which  the  state  has  permitted  freely  to  individuals, 
not  because  the  state  could  not,  but  because  it  did  not  deem  it 
expedient  to  interfere.  In  this  sphere  of  liberty  the  individual  is 
protected  by  the  state  against  encroachment  on  the  part  of  the 
government,  and  by  the  state,  through  the  government,  against 
encroachment  on  the  part  of  other  individuals.  Against  the  state 
itself  there  could  be  no  defense.  "  In  every  politically  organized 
community,  then,  there  exists  a  public  authority  to  which,  from  the 
legal  standpoint,  all  interests  are  potentially  subject,  and  therefore 
liable  to  regulation  and  control  by  the  state  when  this  ruling  power 
decides  them  to  be  of  public  interest."  1 

2.  Externally.  Independent..o£.any  compulsion  or  interference 
on  the  part  of  other  states.  Treaties,  or  the  rules  of  international 
law  by  which  states  agree  to  certain  limitations  on  their  complete 
independence,  do  not  destroy  sovereignty,  since  there  is  no  com- 
pelling authority  to  enforce  them,  states  conforming  to  these 
agreements  "only  at  their"  pleasure.  Besides,  a  state  may  grant 
almost  complete  autonomy  to  its  colonies,  as  in  the  case  of  Canada, 
or  may  give  large  powers  to  its  local  divisions,  as  in  the  common- 
wealths of  the  United  States,  and  still  retain  sovereignty,  since  it 
can  withdraw  these  delegated  powers  at  any  time. 

It  naturally  follows  that  the  sovereignty  of  a  state  cannot  be 
divided.  The  exercise  of  its  powers  may  be  distributed  among 

,  but  sovereignty  or  supreme  will  is  a 
unit^just  as  each  state  is  auml,  and  as  the  Organization  or  govern- 


state  exists  ;  ^iL-se^^c^ignty  is  divided,  more  tl^an  one  qffltp  ^vj^g. 
There  can  be  no  legafpower  back  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  state 
and  no  legal  check  on  its  scope. 

46.  Development  of  theory  of  sovereignty.  The  modern  theory 
of  sovereignty  came  into  existence  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
.sixteenth  century,  as  the  logical  outcome  of  the  decline  of  medieval 
political  mstTftitions  and  ideas  and  the  rise  of  national  states.  Dur- 
ing the  Middle  Ages  no  state,  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word, 
existed.  The  old  unity  based  on  kinship  J? a <]  rl1'Qapppar^  and  the 
modern  idea  of  territorial  allegiance  and  national  unity  had  not  yet 

,  The  ISIcllUli!  Of  Hie  State,  p.  183. 


90  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

arisen.  Ties  of  personal  dependence  bound  individuals  into  groups, 
and  similar  bonds  on  a  larger  scale  held  these  groups  together. 
The  old  belief  that  the  Roman  Empire  was  universal  and  the 
claims  of  the  papacy  to  headship  in  temporal  affairs  prevented 
the  existence  of  independent  and  equal  states.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  divided  authority  of  feudalism  and  the  belief  in  a  law  of  nature, 
superior  to  all  human  laws,  made  impossible  the  modern  idea  of 
the  state's  unlimited  and  indivisible  sovereignty  over  all  its  citizens. 
Such  concepts  of  sovereignty  as  existed  were  a  mingling  of  tribal 
allegiance  and  universal  empire.  From  the  standpoint  of  the  first 
the  king  was  lord  of  his  people ;  from  that  of  the  second  some 
authority  must  exist  supreme  over  all  kings. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  medieval  period  a  number  of  causes  com- 
bined to  create  new  political  ideas.  The  nobles  were  weakened  by 
the  crusades  and  by  their  own  quarrels.  Commerce  and  towns 
struck  a  blow  at  their  monopoly  of  wealth,  new  methods  of  warfare- 
destroyed  their  military  supremacy.  Taking  advantage  of  their 
weakness,  the  kings,  by  conquest,  alliance,  and  marriage,  became 
supreme  within  their  territories.  This  process  was  aided  by  the 
old  traditions  of  the  Roman  Empire  and  by  the  revived  study  of 
Roman  law.  Feudalism,  by  joining  governing  powers  with  land- 
holding,  had  developed  the  idea  of  territorial  sovereignty,  and  as 
the  intermediate  authorities  between  king  and  people  were  re- 
moved, the  king  stood  forth  as  sovereign  of  his  state.  Later,  as 
men  began  to  realize  that  government  was  an  agent  rather  than  a 
master,  sovereignty  was  applied  to  the  state  itself  instead  of  to  the 
king.  France  was  the  first  European  state  to  develop  its  monarchy, 
and  some  theory  was  needed  to  justify  this  new  political  type.  In 
the  writings  of  Bodin  l  modern  ideas  of  sovereignty  were  first 
stated.  The  state  was  recognized  as  supreme  over  all  its  citizens 
and  free  from  external  compul'sion.  Sovereignty  was  defined  as 
the  absolute  and  perpetual  power  of  the  state,  indivisible  and 
territorial  in  nature. 

As  the  outcome  of  such  concepts  international  law  was  devel- 
oped. In  the  great  work  of  Grotius  2  states  were  considered  equal 
and  independent,  with  supreme  jurisdiction  coinciding  with  their 

1  De  la  Republique  (1576).  2  De  Jure  Belli  ac  Pacis  (1625). 


SOVEREIGNTY  97 

boundaries.  States  were  viewed  as  persons  dealing  with  each  other 
as  by  contract ;  while  within  the  state  the  authority  of  the  sover- 
eign was  that  of  an  owner  over  his  property.  States  had  mutual 
rights  and  obligations,  since  all  were  equally  subject  to  the  law  of 
nature.  In  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  modern 
theory  of  sovereignty  was  further  analyzed  in  the  writings  of  John 
Austin  l ;  and  his  conclusions,  exercising  an  enormous  influence  on 
political  thought  in  England  and  America,  underlie  present  sys- 
tems of  jurisprudence.  All  belief  in  so-called  "  natural  law  "  has 
been  abandoned,  and  sovereignty  is  viewed  as  absolute  internal 
authority  and  complete  external  independence. 

47.  Criticism  of  theory  of  sovereignty.  The  preceding  discus- 
sion outlines  the  conception  of  sovereignty  that  forms,  in  the  main, 
the  basis  for  present-day  political  thought.  It  has  been  severely 
criticized,  however,  by  certain  writers.  "  The  objections  raised 
against  it  are  directed  to  show  that  it  is  only  of  a  formal  and 
abstract  nature,  that  it  is  inadequate  in  that  it  does  not  really  indi- 
cate the  ultimate  source  of  political  authority,  and  that  it  presents 
an  erroneous  conception  of  the  nature  of  law."2  In  the  works  of  Sir 
Henry  Maine3  these  objections  have  been  strongly  urged.  Famil- 
iarity with  Oriental  civilization,  where  long-standing  custom  is  law, 
and  where  even  the  most  despotic  ruler  must  act  in  accordance 
with  usages  that  he  would  never  dare  to  change,  led  Maine  to 
question  whether  there  was  in  every  state  a  determinate  sovereign 
that  had  the  right  to  create  and  enforce  law.  Clearly,  such  an  idea 
is  absent  in  the  political  methods  of  Oriental  states.  Even  in  the 
most  advanced  states  there  is  a  large  body  of  custom,  or  common 
law,  which  is  enforced  by  the  courts  although  never  definitely 
formulated  by  legislature.  In  these  states,  however,  the  supreme 
lawmaking  body,  if  it  chose,  could  modify  or  destroy  such  cus- 
toms;  and  the  legal  principle  "what  the  sovereign  permits  he 
commands,"  is  applied  to  them.  The  truth  contained  in  the  criti- 
cism, however,  compels  us  to  narrow  somewhat  the  definitions  of 
^state  and  of  law.  By  state  is  meant  only  those  political  communi-l 
(ties  that  are  fully  organized  and  possess  definite  sovereignty.  B)| 

1  Lectures  on  Jurisprudence.      2  Leacock,  Elements  of  Political  Science,  p.  59. 
8  Early  History  of  Institutions ;  Ancient  Law. 


98  INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

law  is  meant  only  the  commands  issued  directly  by  properly  au- 
thorized governmental  authorities,  and  customs  when  enforced  by 
the  courts.  Any  attempt  further  to  widen  the  connotation  of  law 
breaks  down  the  definite  legal  concept  and  makes  impossible  any 
distinct  line  between  law  and  the  most  vague  public  opinion; 

The  other  objection  urged  against  the  theory  of  sovereignty  — 
that  it  does  not  really  indicate  the  ultimate  source  of  political 
authority  —  opens  up  the  question  of  the  location  of  sovereignty 
within  the  state.  Here  it  will  be  sufficient  to  note  that  any  attempt 
to  find  the  final  source  of  political  influence*  meets  insuperable 
difficulties.  It  is,  of  course,  quite  possible  that  the  legal  sovereign 
is  influenced  by  public  opinion,  by  certain  interests  or  classes,  by 
religious  ideas,  or  by  any  other  of  the  motives  that  determine 
human  action.  Any  attempt,  however,  to  find  a  "  political  sover- 
eign "  back  of  the  legal  sovereign  destroys  the  value  of  the  entire 
concept  and  reduces  sovereignty  to  a  mere  catalogue  of  influences. 
The  point  of  view  common  to  most  of  the  critics  is  that  ultimate 
sovereignty  rests  in  the  mass  of  the  people.  This,  together  with 
the  whole  question  of  the  location  of  sovereignty,  will  be  discussed 
in  the  following  sections. 

48.  Location  of  sovereignty.  Probably  the  most  difficult  topic 
with  which  political  science  has  to  deal  is  the  location  of  sov- 
ereignty within  the  state.  After  it  has  been  determined  that 
sovereignty  is  the  essence  of  the  state,  and  that  it  includes  both 
the  external  independence  of  the  state  from  interference  on  the 
part  of  other  states,  and  the  internal  authority  of  the  state  over  all 
its  citizens,  the  question  next  in  order  is,  What  person  or  body 
of  persons  within  the  state  ultimately  expresses  the  state's  will  and 
enforces  the  state's  authority  ?  In  other  words,  where,  within  the 
state,  is  sovereignty  located  ?  Three  main  solutions  have  been 
offered  as  answers  to  this  vexing  problem,  locating  sovereignty 
respectively  in  : 

1.  The  people  of  the  state. 

2.  The  organization  which  has  a  legal  right  to  make  or  amend 
the  constitution  of  the  state. 

3.  The  sum  total  of  the  legal  lawmaking  bodies  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  state. 


SOVEREIGNTY 


99 


Modifications  in  detail  are  found  in  the  writings  of  various  men, 
but  the  essentials  may  be  reduced  to  the  above  statements.  Each 
of  these  solutions  contains  important  elements  of  truth ;  and 
against  each  of  them  serious  objections  may  be  urged.  Since  the 
leading  writers  on  political  science  are  not  agreed  in  regard  to  this 
point,  each  of  these  theories  will  be  considered  in  turn,  and  its 
strength  and  weakness  indicated. 

49.  Popular  sovereignty.  The  somewhat  indefinite  theory  that 
considers  sovereignty  as  located  in  the  people  is  the  logical  out- 
come of  the  growth  of  democracy  during  the  last  century.  It 
underlay  the  natural-rights  philosophy  as  applied  to  the  American 
and  French  Revolutions,  it  has  been  expressed  in  many  recent 
political  documents,  and  it  forms  the  background  for  the  political 
thinking  of  most  people.  It  may  be  briefly  stated  as  follows : 
Sovereignty,  in  last  resort,  is  a  matter  of  force  and  depends  upon 
the  ability  to  secure  or  to  compel  .obedience ;  hence,  the  power 
that  in  case  of  a  sffuggiewould  have  the  strength  to  command 
obedience  is  the  sovereign.  In  early  times,  largely  due  to  super- 
stitious religious  ideas,  the  chief  or  king  was  sovereign.  Later,  due 
to  superior  intelligence,  organization,  and  military  equipment,  a 
minority  of  the  people  possessed  sovereignty.  To-day,  due  to  the 
general  spread  of  intelligence,  wealth,  and  political  consciousness, 
men  are  comparatively  equal ;  and  ultimate  political  authority  rests 
in  a  majority,  or  at  least  in  a  large  number  of  the  people.  Ordi- 
narily this  sovereignty  is  exercised  through  suffrage  ;  in  case  of 
dispute  as  to  its  location  the  majority  would  be  victorious  in  an 
appeal , to  arms.  Hence  the  idea  of  popular^  sovereignty  —  qf_the 
authority  of  the  state  existing..som£how.  in  the  mass  of  its  citizens 
—  has  arisen,  and  in  the  minds  of  most  people  has  become  a 
fetich  almost  too  sacred  to  touch. 

Several  objections,  however,  arise  the  moment  that  one  attempts 
to  analyze  this  concept  and  give  it  a  definite  and  legal  meaning. 
What  persons  or  how  many  persons  possess  sovereignty  in  any 
•given  state?  In  case  of  an  appeal  to  arms  the  majority  is  not 
necessarily  the  stronger.  Women  and  children  are"  of  no  military 
value,  and  among  the.  men  an  organized  group  is  more  powerful 
than  an  unorganized 'mass,  since  the  only  effective  way  of  using 


100         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

force  is  through  united  effort,  in  other  words,  through  obeying  a 
commander.  Without  discipline  a  mass  of  people  is  but  a  mob. 
But  when  the  people  follow  the  commands  of  their  leaders,  where 
is  their  sovereignty?  Just  in  proportion  as  the  people  are  in  a 
position  to  exercise  sovereignty  in  case  of  war,  they  find  that  real 
power  has  passed  to  the  military  dictators  that  they  have  created. 
Similar  difficulty  is  met,  under  ordinary  conditions,  if  the  exercise 
of  suffrage  is  taken  as  the  indication  of  popular  sovereignty.  Kot^ 
more  than  one  fifth  of  the  population  in  any  modern  state  are 
voters,  and  within  that  number  a  majority  would  be  but  little  more 
than  one  tenth  of  the  entire  citizen  body.  Besides,  these  cannot 
all  express  their  will,  an,d  hence  must  choose  officials  and  repre- 
sentatives. Unless  a  perfect  and  constant  system  of  initiative  and 
referendum  be  maintained,  the  control  of  the  people  over  the  gov- 
ernment which  they  have  created  is  very  slight.  The  machinery 
that  they  form  to  enable  them  to  govern  themselves  takes  the 
power  out  of  their  hands.  Evidently  the  number  of  people  who 
are  sovereign  is,  from  this  standpoint,  indefinite. 

There  is  a  still  more  fatal  objection  to  this  theory.  It  destroys 
the  whole  legal  value  of  sovereignty.  If  by  stateisjp&aut  a  people 
organized  by  means  of  a  government  which  mates  and  enforces 
law,  some  organization  and  some  method  of  government  is  the 
legal  one,  otherwise  no  state  exists.  Any  attempt  to  make  or  en- 
force law  except  by  legal  means  is  not  an  act  of  the  sovereign,  but 
is  an  illegal  revolt.  The  people  can  exercise  sovereignty  only 
through  legal  channels,  in  which  case  they  cannot  exercise  it  at 
all ;  or  through  a  revolution,  in  which  case  sovereignty  is  being 
relocated  and  will  reappear  in  another  form,  since  permanent 
revolution  would  destroy  the  state.  Hence  the  sovereignty  of  the 
people  is,  in  time  of  peace,  nothing  more  than  public  opinion  ;  in 
case  of  a  contest,  only  the  "  might  of  revolution,"  —  not  a  legal 
power  but  a  revolt  against  the  existing  sovereign.  Such  sover- 
eignty could  be  exercised  only  by  a  constant  series  of  revolutions 
or  by  a  constant  system  of  initiative  and  referendum,  practically 
unworkable.  Sovereignty  *of  the  people  is,  in  fact,  by  the  very 
definition  of  the  state,  a  contradiction  in  terms. 

At  the  same  time  the  concept  of  popular  sovereignty  contains 


SOVEREIGNTY  IOI 

several  ideas  of  value.  While  sovereignty,  in  a  legal  sense/  is  not 
located  in  the  people,  they  are  potentially  the  ultimate  check  on 
the  sovereign  because  of  the  possibility  of  revolution ;  and  in  the 
gradual  formation  of  common  law  and  its  enforcement  by  the 
courts,  when  demanded  by  public  opinion,  the  people  approach 
the  direct  exercise  of  lawmaking  power.  Moreover,  the  tendency 
in  modern  states  is  to  organize  the  state  and  locate  sovereignty  in 
such  a  way  as  to  enable  public  opinion  to  express  itself  in  a  legal 
way  as  readily  as  possible.  This  development  is  ordinarily  called  the 
growth  of  democracy  ;  and  some  of  its  most  important  devices  are 
the  widening  of  the  electorate,  proportional  representation,  respon- 
sibility of  government  to  majority  party,  frequent  elections,  local 
self-government,  and  the  use  of  initiative  and  referendum.  By 
these  and  similar  means  a  satisfactory  relation  is  maintained  be- 
tween the  mass  of  the  people  and  the  government,  and  the  danger 
of  revolution  is  minimized.  Constitutional  government  is  valuable, 
since  it  prescribes  definite  ways  by  which  the  state  will  exercise  its 
sovereign  power,  thus  protecting  citizens  from  arbitrary  action, 
such  action  being  illegal.  Popular  government  is  valuable,  since 
it  provides  means  through  which  the  wishes  of  the  people  may  be 
known,  with  the  probability  that  these  wishes  will  be  considered  by 
the  state.1  It  is  true  that,  in  modern  constitutional  democratic 
states  at  least,  the  border  line  between  public  opinion  and  sover- 
eignty is  indistinct,  and  points  of  contact  are  numerous. 

50.  Sovereignty  as  constitution-making  power.  According  to 
this  theory  sovereignty  is  located  in  that  body  of  persons  who  may 
legally  make,  or,  what  is  essentially  the  same,  may  amend  the  con- 
stitution of  the  state.  Such  a  conception  is  often  called  legal  _ 
sovereignty,  as  distinct  from  the  ultimate  force  or  political  sov- 
ereignty, which  may  be  conceived  as  vested  potentially  in  the 
people.  Its  point  of  view  may  be  expressed  as  follows :  The_ 
fundamental  form  of  a  state  is  called  its  constitution.  This  collec- 
tion of  principles  creates  government,  outlines  its  powers,  and 
adjusts  the  relation  of  the  state  to  its  citizens.  Hence  the  govern- 
ment is  limited  in  its  powers  by  the  constitution,  and  is  inferior  in 
authority  to  the  body  that  may  create  or  change  this  fundamental 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  302. 


102          INTRODUCTION,  TO  POLITICAL  SCIE 

document.  There  is  no  higher  authority  possible  than  that  which 
creates  the  constitution.  That  authority  expresses  the  direct  will 
of  the  state  and  is  therefore  sovereign.  In  applying  this  principle 
to  specific  states  it  would  be  found  that  in  England  sovereignty  is 
located  in  Parliament,  i.e.  in  King,  Lords,  and  Commons.  Legally 
it  is  supreme  and  its  acts  cannot  be  questioned.  No  authority  exists 
to  declare  its  acts  void,  and  no  statute  or  official  is  exempt  from 
its  jurisdiction.  In  France  the  Senate  and  Chamber  of  Deputies  in 
joint  session  have  similar  powers.  They  represent  the  highest 
legal  authority  in  the  state  and  may  alter  its  fundamental  laws.  In 
Germany  changes  in-  the  constitution  follow  the  ordinary  course  of 
legislation,  except  for  the  larger  majority  required  in  the  upper 
house,  and  the  right  of  each  commonwealth  to  veto  changes  which 
concern  its  own  specific  rights.  The  Constitution  of  the^jLJnited 
States  may  be  amended  in  any  one  of  four  ways^gtftc^Jamend 
ments  may  be  proposed  by  two  thirds  of  both  houses  of  Congress, 
dtfcy  a  convention  called  by  Congress  at  the  request  of  the  legis- 
latures  of  two  thirds  of  the  rommon wealths,  angjmay  be  ratified 
by  the  legislatures  of  three  fourths  of  the  commonwealths,  4ffiy- 
conventions  in  three  fourths  of  the  commonwealths^  Congress 
having  the  right  to  determine  one  or  the  other  method  of  ratifica- 
tion. In  all  modern  states,  therefore,  some  organization  of  the; 
state,  back  of  the  government  and  more  or  less  distinct  from  it, 
may  be  conceived.  In  the  United  States  this  distinction  is  quite 
clear  ;  in  England  it  exists  merely  in  the  nature  of  the  laws  with 
which  Parliament  deals  ;  but  in  any  state,  wherever  the  ultimate 
power  of  constitution-making  is  found,  there  legal  I  sovereignty 
exists.  ^  \ 

Although  this  theory,  logically  based  on  the  modern  ^conception 
of   sovereignty,  bears   legal   scrutiny  and   is   accepted   by   many, 
several  serious  objections  may  be  urged  against  it.    These  con- 
stitution-making organs  act  intermittently  and  at  infrequent  inter- 
vals, in   some  cases  never,  while  the  sovereignty  of  the  state  is 
being  constantly  exercised.    It  seems  scarcely  logicnl  to  cons'  * 
sovereignty,  the  life  and  essence  of  the  state,  as  lying  dormai" 
latent.    Besides,  sovereignty,  as  a  question  of  fact,  deals  with 
organs  that  express  the  state's  will  now,  not  with   I 


SOVEREIGNTY  103 

revolutionary  source  of  authority  by  which  the  people,  in  creating 
the  state,  established  its  government.  Finally,  such^odies,  when 
they  do  act,  are  really  a  part  of  the  government.  They  must  be 
put  in  motion  by  the  government,  and  are  only  special  organs  of 
government,  having  special  functions,  in  many  states  the  only 
difference  from  ordinary  organs  being  in  the  manner  of  procedure 
or  in  the  majority  required.  In  so  far  as  a  constitution-amending 
body  is  distinguished  from  the  regular  organs  of  government,  its 
power  is  specifically  limited  to  the  creation  or  the  ratification  of 
properly  proposed  constitutional  amendments.  It  is  thus  a  special 
organ  which,  according  to  the  fundamental  organization  of  the 
state,  has  the  legal  right  to  redistribute  the  total  exercise  of  sov- 
ereign powers  among  the  various  organs  of  government.  It  has 
no  further  powers,  and  it  must  act  only  in  the  manner  legally 
prescribed. 

51.  Sovereignty  as  lawmaking  power.  From  th,is  point  of 
view  sovereignty  is  locatpH  jn  thp  snrn  total  of  all  lawmaking 
Bodies  in  the^  government,  provided  these  act  within  the  scope  of 
their  legal  competence.  Since  the  expression  of  the  state  s  will  is 
its"  highest  manifestation  of  power,  all  those  bodies  that  share 
legally  in  expressing  that  will  are  exercising  sovereignty.  By  this 
is  meant  not  legislatures  alone,  but  all  the  organs  of  government 
except  those  that  are  purely  administrative,  such .  organs  being 
merely  the  agents  of  the  sovereign.  In  some  cases  the  same  organ 
may  at  one  time  be  expressing  the  state's  will,  and  at  another  time 
administering  it :  in  the  first  case  exercising  sovereign  power ;  in 
the  second,  not.  For  instance,  lawmaking  bodies  include : l 

1.  Legislatures.    National,  commonwealth,  or  local. 

2.  Courts.    In  so  far  as  they  create  law,  not  when  merely  inter- 
preting or  applying  existing  law. 

3.  Executive  o^cials.     In  so  far  as  they  create  law,  by  ordi- 
nances, proclamations,  etc. 

4.  Conventions.    When  acting  legally  as  lawmaking  bodies,  as 
in  the  case  of  a  constitutional  convention  properly  assembled. 

5.  Electorate.    When  exercising  powers  of  referendum,  or  of 

plebiscite? . 

* 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  303. 


104         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

In  all  these  cases  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  bodies  exer- 
cise such  powers  and  proceed  in  such  manner  only  as  the  funda- 
mental laws  of  the  state  provide,  though  these  laws  may  be  changed 
in  a  legal  way  if  it  is  so  desired.  Under  these  conditions  the 
aggregate  of  lawmaking  bodies  constitutes  the  depository  in  which 
the  state's  sovereignty  is  located. 

This  theory  considers  the  state  as  a  unit  and  its  government  as 
a  unit.  Each  state  is  completely  organized  in  its  government,  and 
the  government  includes  the  total  organization  of  the  state,  bodies 
which  act  infrequently  and  irregularly,  as  well  as  those  that  act 
frequently  and  regularly,  being  included.  It  makes  no  distinction 
between  constitutional  law  and  statute  law,  or  between  the  various 
separations  or  divisions  of  government.  All  parts  of  the  govern- 
ment, acting  within  their  legal  sphere,  are  equal ;  and  all  combined 
form  the  organization  of  the  state.  Sovereignty  is  thus  considered 
as  the  "  daily  operative  power  of  framing  and  giving  efficacy  to 
laws.  ...  It  lives,  it  plans,  it  executes.  It  is  the  organic  organi- 
zation by  the  state  of  its  law  and  policy ;  and  the  sovereign  power 
is  the  highest  originative  organ  of  the  state."  l  In  many  respects 
this  is  the  most  satisfactory  solution  of  this  difficult  problem.  It 
combines  the  strongest  points  of  the  other  two  theories  and  adheres 
most  closely  to  actual  facts.  Like  the  popular-soverei^^theorv. 
if  rpmp-nJ7.ps  that,  in  modern  democratic  states,  sovereign  pnwgrs 
are  widely  distributed  and  exercised  by  large  numbers  of  the  sfote's 
citizens.  Like  the  constitution-making  theory,  it  recognizes^that 
sovereignty  is  a  legal  concept  and  can  be  exercised  only /through 
legal  channels  and  in_.a  legal  manner.  It  avoids~the  vagueness 
and  loose  thinking  of  the  first  point  of  view ;  at  the  sime  time 
it  steers  clear  of  the  legal  abstraction,  which,  in  the  second,  by 
pushing  sovereignty  too  far  back,  almost  destroys  its  existence. 

52.  Revolution.  Revolution  may  be  defined  as  a  relocation  of 
sovereignty.  If  unsuccessful,  the  attempt  is  called  a  rebellion.  As 
sovereignty  has  both  an  external  and  an  internal  aspect,  so  revolu- 
tions may  either  adjust  the  outward  relations  of  states  or  may  alter 
their  internal  organization.  The  most  common  example  of  external 
revolution  occurs  when  part  of  a  state  separates  itself  from  the 

1  Wilson,  An  Old  Master  and  Other  Essays,  p.  87. 


SOVEREIGNTY 

remainder  and  establishes  itself  as  an  independent  state.  In  this 
case  two  sovereignties  exist  where  formerly  there  was  but  one. 
The  separation  of  the  American  colonies  from  England,  and  of 
the  South  American  republics  from  Spain,  are  examples. 

While  not  so  considered  in  ordinary  thinking,  the  merging  of 
sovereignty,  by  which  formerly  independent  states  become  one 
state,  is  in  essence  also  a  revolution.  From  a  political  standpoint, 
what  actually  takes  place  is  a  destruction  of  the  old  state  sovereign- 
ties and  the  creation,  as  a  national  people,  of  a  new  state.  Of  such 
relocations  of  sovereignty  the  formation  of  the  United  States  and 
of  the  German  Empire  are  examples.  Both  the  separation  of  one 
state  into  several  and  the  incorporation  of  several  states  into  one 
may  take  place  by  either  peaceful  or  violent  methods.  In  all  cases 
some  sovereignty  is  destroyed  and  new  sovereignty  created. 

An  internal  revolution  occurs  when  sovereignty  is  relocated 
within  a  staTe.  '^ucHTevolutions  may__be  of  three  kinds  : l 

1.  Anarchical,  directed  to  the  destruction  of  existing  legal  organ- 
ization, without  definite  aims  as  to  the  political  future. 

2.  Constitutional,  aiming  to  reorganize  the  state  and  establish 
a  new  form  of  government. 

3.  Governmental,  aiming  to  change  the  personality  of  the  gov- 
ernment or  to  resist  some  governmental  measure,  either  because  it 
is  illegal  or  because,  though  legal,  it  does  not  coincide  with  exist- 
ing political  thought. 

In  its  broadest  sense  a  redistribution  of  sovereignty  is  almost 
constantly  taking  place,  as  £he  organization  of  the  state  adjusts 
itself  to  changing  conditions.  Sometimes,  however,  it .  happens 
that  organization  remains  stationary  until  a  great  discrepancy  exists 
between  actual  conditions  and  legal  forms.  The  sudden  change, 
peaceful  or  violent,  that  readjusts  affairs  is  illustrated  by  the 
French  Revolution  and  the  English  Revolution  of  1688. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  'sovereignty  is  a  question  of  fact. 
As  soon  as  a  power  is  able  to  enforce  its  commands  without  itself 
obeying  any  higher  authority,  it  is  sovereign,  in  spite  of  the  con- 
tinuance of  legal  fictions,  such  as  the  power  of  the  crown  in  Eng-  '* 
or  of  the  electoral  college  in  the  United  States.    On  the  other 

1  Amos,  The  Science  of  Politics,  pp.  430-431. 


106          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

hand,  potential  sovereignty  is  not  sovereignty  until  it  is  in  fact 
exercised.  The  "  might  of  revolution  "  must  be  put  into  operation 
before  sovereignty  can  be  fetorated-.  Even  then  it  may  be  difficult 
to  distinguish  the  real  sovereign,  as  the  distinction  between  de  jure 
and  de  facto  governments  indicates.  The  final  test  of  sovereignty 
will  be  its  ability  to  exercise  unquestioned  authority  over  its  own 
citizens,  and  its  recognition  by  other  states. 

That  authority  which  is  in  fact  supreme  and  which  receives  the 
obedience  of  the  mass  of  the  people  in  the  state  is  the- actual  or 
de  facto  sovereign.  This  sovereignty  may  rest  on  no  legal  basis, 
but  may  depend  upon  physical  force  or  religious  influence.T~The 
authority  of  Cromwell  in  England  and  of  Napoleon  in  France 
rested  on  revolution  and  force,  not  upon  law,  yet  they  exercised 
de  facto  sovereignty.  The  Continental  Congress  that  directed  the 
American  Revolution,  and  the  French  assembly  that  concluded 
the  war  with  Germany  in  1871,  were  not  legally  created  govern- 
ing bodies,  yet  under  the  pressure  of  necessity  they  exercised  full 
powers  of  sovereignty.  When  such  sovereignty  gives  evidence 
that  it  can  maintain  its  power  it  is  morally  entitled  to  receive 
obedience  from  within  the  state  and  recognition  from  other  states, 
regardless  of  the  nature  of  its  origin.  Obviously,  such  sovereignty, 
if  it  be  permanent,  will  ultimately  acquire  a  legal  status,  either 
through  the  regular  legal  channels  or  through  the  tacit  acquies- 
cence of  all  parties  concerned. 

On  the  other  hand,  de  jure  sovereignty  depends  for  its  validity 
not  upon  the  actual  obedience  rendered  to  it,  but  uponyits  legal_ 
right  to  command  obedience.  Such  sovereignty,  at  one  time  real 
and  powerful,  may  be  displaced  by  force  or  may  go  to  pieces 
through  internal  disorganization,  but  it  has  a  legal  claim  to  exist- 
ence until  the  de  facto  sovereignty  acquires  a  permanent  and 
organized  status.  From  the  standpoint  of  England  she  possessed 
a  de  jure  sovereignty  over  the  American  colonies  until  the  treaty 
of  1783  granted  them  independence.  William  the  Conqueror  be- 
came a  de  jtire  ruler  in  England  not  by  his  conquest,  but  by  his 
election  at  the  hands  of  the  English  people. 

Unless  the  de  facto  and  de  jure  sovereignties  coincide  there  is 
constant  danger  of  revolution,  since  those  who  possess  the  actual 


SOVEREIGNTY 


107 


power  are  naturally  unwilling  to  submit  to  a  decadent  and  power- 
less legal  authority ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  mankind  has  a  deep- 
rooted  objection  to  authority  that  rests  on  force  alone  without 
legal  sanction.  Political  expediency  demands  that  sovereignty 
shall  possess  a  legal  status  and  at  the  same  time  be  able  to  main- 
tain itself  by  actual  force.  At  any  given  time  there  is  of  course 
but  one  sovereignty  in  a  state,  although  in  time  of  revolution  it 
may  be  difficult  to  determine  just  where  that  sovereignty  is  to  be 
found.  Tt  must  also  be  remembered  that  real  or  de  facto  sover- 
eignty is  never  "unlawful/'  since  the  sanction  of  all  law  rests 
ultimately  uppnsuch_ 
nature  that  sovereignty  may  be. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  IX 

REFERENCES 

RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  INDIVIDUAL 

NATURE  OF  CIVIL  LIBERTY 

1.  CIVIL  LIBERTY 

2.  NATIONAL  LIBERTY 

3.  POLITICAL  LIBERTY 

GUARANTEE  OF  CIVIL  LIBERTY 

1.  AGAINST  THE  GOVERNMENT 

2.  AGAINST    INDIVIDUALS    OR  ASSOCIATIONS    OF   INDI 

VIDUALS 

CONTENT  OF  CIVIL  LIBERTY 

1.  FREEDOM  OF  THE  PERSON 

2.  EQUALITY  BEFORE  THE  LAW 

3.  SECURITY  OF  PRIVATE  PROPERTY 

4.  FREEDOM  OF  OPINION  AND  OF  ITS  EXPR 

5.  FREEDOM  OF  CONSCIENCE 

POLITICAL  LIBERTY 


108 


CHAPTER  IX 

INDIVIDUAL  LIBERTY 

REFERENCES 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  II,  chaps,  xxi,  xxii 

BOSANQUET,  B.  The  Philosophical  Theory  of  the  State,  chaps,  iii-vi 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  174-264 

HILL,  M.  Liberty  Documents 

LIEBER,  F.  Civil  Liberty 

McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  Part  VIII 

MCKECHNIE,  W.  S.  The  State  and  the  Individual 

McKENZiE,  J.  S.  Introduction  to  Social  Philosophy,  chap,  iii 

MAY,  T.  E.  Constitutional  History  of  England,  Vol.  II,  chaps,  ix-xi 

MEDLEY,  D.  J.  English  Constitutional  History,  chap,  ix 

MILL,  J.  S.  On  Liberty 

RITCHIE,  D.  G.  Natural  Rights,  chaps,  vi-xiv 

RITCHIE,  D.  G.  Principles  of  State  Interference,  chap,  iii 

SCHERGER,  G.  L.  The  Evolution  of  Modern  Liberty 

SEELEY,  J.  R.  Introduction  to  Political  Science,  Lectures  V,  VI 

SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chaps,  iii-xii 

SMITH,  J.  A.  The  Spirit  of  American  Government,  chaps,  xi,  xii 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  I,  Part  II,  chap,  v 

53.  Relation  of  state  to  individual.  The  proper  relation  be- 
tween the  individual  and  the  various  social  organizations  of 
which  he  is  a  member  has  long  been  a  problem  on  which  great 
thinkers  have  differed.  Whether  the  individual  or  the  organization 
is  the  true  unit,  and  should  be  developed  at  the  expense  of  the 
other  in  case  of  conflict,  is  a  controversy  that  has  affected  indus- 
trial, social,  and  political  relations.  From  the  political  standpoint 
there  is,  on  the  one  hand,  the  doctrine  that  the  state  is  a  neces- 
sary evil ;  that  it  should  do  nothing  except  maintain  peace  and 
order,  and  thus  give  equal  opportunity  for  individuals  to  develop 
according  to  their  ability.  On  the  other  hand  is  the  belief  that  the 
state  should  exercise  large  powers  and  subordinate  the  individual 
to  the  interests  of  the  whole. 

The  best  adjustment  of  individual  and  state  activity,  and  the 
proper  scope  of  state  functions,  will  be  discussed  in  the  latter  part 

109 


HO         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

of  this  volume.1  At  present  the  question  of  individual  liberty  will 
be  viewed  in  its  relation  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  state.  The  pre- 
ceding chapter  emphasized  the  fact  that  in  every  state  some 
authority  must  exist,  supreme  over  the  will  of  any  individual  or 
association  of  individuals  within  the  state.  This  is  called  sover- 
eignty. From  the  standpoint  of  the  individual,  however,  the  pur- 
pose of  the  state  is  to  secure  to  each  individual  conditions  for  "his 
highest  development  and  freedom.  Apparently  there  is  a  funda- 
mental contradiction  between  sovereignty  and  liberty.  If  the 
authority  of  the  state  be  absolute,  how  can  liberty  exist ;  if  the 
individual  has  liberty,  what  has  become  of  sovereignty  ?  Sover- 
eignty alone  is  despotism  and  destroys  liberty,  while  liberty  alone 
is  anarchy  and  destroys  sovereignty.  The  efforts  made  by  states 
to  reach  a  satisfactory  compromise  between  these  two  equally  un- 
desirable extremes  comprise  a  large  part  of  the  history  of  politics, 
and  no  permanent  solution  has  yet  been  reached.  However,  a  more 
careful  analysis  of  individual  liberty  will  show  its  real  nature  and 
prove  that,  instead  of  being  opposed  to  sovereignty,  it  is  dependent 
upon  it.  In  fact  it  is  possible  only  if  sovereignty  exists,  and  be- 
comes more  perfect  as  sovereignty  is  more  completely  organized. 

54.  Nature  of  civil  liberty.  A  century  and  more  ago  men  spoke 
much  of  natural  rights.  Life,  liberty,  property,  the  pursuit  of  hap- 
piness, and  other  similar  privileges  were  considered  inalienable 
rights  under  the  laws  of  nature,  A  condition  of  perfect  liberty, . 
existing  before  governments  arose,  was  conceived,  often  with  a  sigh 
of  regret  that  this  "  state  of  nature  "  could  not  last  forever.  An- 
alysis shows  the  fallacy  in  such  thinking.  In  a  state  of  nature 
liberty  would  be  impossible.  Each  person  would  have  "  rights  " 
only  as  he  could  secure  them  by  force.  "Natural  rights  "  of  one 
would  encroach  upon  the  "  natural  rights  "  of  others,  thus  destroy- 
ing the  liberty  of  all.  That  every  person  could  have  liberty  to  do 
as  he  chose  in  all  things  is  obviously  absurd.  In  such  a  condition 
only  one  person  could  have  absolute  liberty,  and  he  would  be  all- 
powerful. 

The  greatest. liberty  possible  is  the  right  to  do  as  one  pleases 
^  while  encroaching  least  on  the  wishes  of  others.    This  secures  the 

1  See  Part  III. 


INDIVIDUAL  LIBERTY  III 

largest  amount  of  liberty  for  all.  Liberty  in  society,  or  civiL  liberty, 
has  therefore  both  a  positive  and  a  negative  side.  It  includes  right 
to  free  action_and  immunity  from  interference  ;  but  in  order  to 
maintain  such  a  condition  some  authority  is  needed  that  can  set 
bounds  to  the  liberty  of  each  and  enforce  the  rights  ol  .all.  The 
organization  that  arose  for  this  purpose  is  the  state.  It  is  therefore 
the  only  source  of  real  liberty.  Since  it  is  sovereign  over  all,  it- 
alone  can  create  and  enforce  rights  and  obligations.  Evidently, 
then,  the  individual  can  have  no  rights  or  immunities  against  the 
state.  The  state  takes  his  life  as  a  penalty  for  offenses  against  its 
laws,  or,  if  needed,  irCwarT  The  state  takes  nTs "property  in  the 
form  of  taxes ;  his  pursuit  of  happiness  must  not  run  counter  to 
similar  pursuits  on  the  part  of  his  neighbors.  As  population  grows 
and  society  becomes  more  complex,  the  relations  of  man  to  man 
need  more  constant  safeguarding,  and  the  liberty  of  each  is  more 
restricted  for  the  best  interests  of  all. 

The  state,  then,  is  the  only  source  of  civil  .liberty*    Its  sover-i, 
eignty  alone  enables  rights  to  exist.    Its  laws  are  not  only  limita--j 
tions  on  the  freedom  of  individuals,  but  they  are  the  only  guarantees  I 
and  defenders  of  individual  freedom.    Anarchy,  instead  of  creating 
absolute  freedom,  would  destroy  it.    Sovereignty  and  liberty  aigjipU 
contradictory  terms,  but  correlative,  —  the  same  thing  viewed  from  1 
different  aspects,  the  former  from  thp  sfafp's  point  of  view.  tHe 
latter  from  that  of  the  individual. 

In  common  usage  several  other  meanings  of  the  term  "  liberty  " 
have  helped  to  cloud  its  real  political  connotation. 

1 .  It  is  sometimes  used  in  the  sense  of  national  independence, 
—  of  freedom  from  control  on  the  part  of  other  states.    Th^s  the 

United  States  won  liberty  from  England,  or  the  South  American 
republics  from  Spain.  The  term  "  national  liberty  "  is  sometimes 
used  to  indicate  this  meaning.  Evidently  this  is  a  question  of  sov- 
ereignty in  its  external  aspect.  A  new  state  has  arisen  and  in  its 
hands  rests  the  creation  of  individual  liberty  for  its  citizens. 

2.  Sometimes  liberty  is  used  as  a  synonym  for  democracy,  or 
popular    government.    Other  things  being  equal,  a    government 
controlled  by  the  masses  will  better  safeguard  the  interests  of  all 
than  a  government  in  the  hands  of  a  class  or  of  a  few ;  but  this  is 


112          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

not  necessarily  true.  A  benevolent  despot  may  grant  more  civil 
liberty  to  his  subjects  than  a  democracy  that  disregards  the  wishes 
of  a  minority.  .  Civil  liberty  consists  of  the  rights  and,  privileges 
that  the  state  creates  and  enforces,  not  of  the  share  that  the  indi- 
vidual has  in  political  power.  This  latter  may  be  termed  political 
liberty,  and  is  dependent  upon  the  location  of  sovereignty  and  the 
organization  of  government  in  each  state.  ,  }s 

55.  Guarantee  of  civil  liberty.  A  further  analysis  of  the  indi- 
vidual liberty  that  the  state  creates  and  safeguards  shows  it  to  be 
twofold.  The  individual  is  protected  by  the  sovereignty  of  the 
state: 

1 .  Against  the  government 

2.  Against  other  individuals  or  associations  of  individuals. 
Against  the  government  the  individual  is  protected  directly  by 

the  state,  which  creates  the  government  and  outlines  the  scope  of 
its  powers.  Against  other  individuals  or  associations  of  individuals 
protection  is  indirectly  given  by  the  state  through  the  government. 
On  its  negative_side  individual  liberty  consists  of  exemption  in  a 
certain  sphere  against  encroachment  on  the  part  of  the  govern- 
ment, except  in  the  legal  method  and  to  the  legal  extent  prescribed 
by  the  state.  On  its  positive  side  individual  liberty  consists  of 
rights  to  exercise  certain  prerogatives,  and  to  call  upon  the^govern- 
ment  to  maintain  these  rights  against  any  other  individual  or 
association  of  individuals.  From  the  standpoint  of  immunity 
against  the  government,  individual  liberty  is  create^  by  publft 
law  ;  from  the  standpoint  of  rights  against  other  individuals,  it  is 
created  by  private  law.  In  the  latter  case  the  government  is  merely 
an  arbiter,  in  the  former  it  is  itself  a  party. 

The  contents  of  this  private  law  that  regulates  the  dealings  of 
man  with  man,  and  the  method  of  its  creation  and  enforcement, 
are,  in  the  main,  similar  in  all  advanced  states,  and  will  be  dis- 
cussed in  a  later  chapter  on  law.1  Modern  states  differ,  however, 
in  the  legal  guarantee  that  their  citizens  possess  against  encroach- 
ment on  the  part  of  the  government ;  and  this  aspect  of  individual 
liberty  needs  further  consideration.  ^Ey^ery  fully  organizecLpolitical 
community  possesses  a  body  of  fundamentaT~principIes7  written  or 

1  See  Chapter  X. 


INDIVIDUAL  LIBERTY  1 1 3 

unwritten,  called  a  constitution.  In  accordance  with_Jhese__prin- 
ciples  the  state  is  organized  ;  that  is,  its  government  is  created, 
the  scope  of  its  powers^and  the  manner  of  their  exercise  being 
broadly  outlined.  By  this  means  also  the  sphere  of  individual 
liberty,  in  so  far  as. immunity  against  the  government  is  concerned, 
is  indicated,  since  those  powers  forbidden  to  the  government  re- 
main to  the  individual.  Consequently  the  manner  in  which  this 
adjustment  of  powers  may  be  modified  and  the  authority  of  gov- 
ernment exercised,  determine  the  legal  guarantee  which  the  indi- 
vidual possesses  against  governmental  encroachment.  In  other 
words,  the  method  of  constitutional  amendment  and  the  separation 


ofjgpwers  within  the  government  are  of  importance,  since  they 
determine  whether  there  is  an  organization  back  of  the  ordina 
^government  that  may  limit  its  powers ;  whether  one  part  of  the 
government  may  protect  the  individual  against  another  part ;  01 
whether  individual  liberty  is  at  the  mercy  of  the  government 
consisting  of  such  immunities  alone  as  the  government  itseli 
may  see  fit  to  grant. 

In  applying  this  analysis  to  leading  modern  states'  it  is  found 
that  in  England  and  France  the  authority  of  the  legislature  is  final. 
Against  it  the  individual  possesses  legally  only  such  immunity  as 
it  chooses  to  grant.  It  may  alter  the  constitution  ;  its  actions  can- 
not legally  be  questioned ;  and  the  judiciary  that  interprets  its 
laws  is  at  its  mercy,  since  it  may  abolish  the  judicial  department 
^f  modify  the  tenure  of  the  judges.  In  both  England  and  France 
the  legislatures,  by  statute,  have  marked  out  a  large  sphere  of 
individual  liberty,  but  they  may  legally  abolish  this  at  any  time.  In 
France,  moreover,  the  individual  has  no  legal  protection  against 
executive  encroachment,  since  the  courts  that  decide  disputes  be- 
tween individual  and  administration  are  controlled  by  the  executive 
power.  In  England  the  individual  is  protected  from  executive  en- 
croachment by  the  j,udiciary,  since  judicial  tenure  is  ^independent 
of  the  executive  power.  In  Germany  and  the  United  1§tates  cer- 
tain spheres  of  individual  liberty  are  created  by  their  consJatulions, 
and,  therefore,  may  not  be  legally  violated  by  any  department  of 
the  government.  In  the  United  States  the  federal  courts,  created 
by  the  constitution,  protect  the  individual  in  this  sphere  against 


114          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

both  legislative  and  executive  encroachment.  Back  of  this  is  the 
power  to  amend  the  constitution  itself,  which  may  be  exercised 
independent  of  the  ordinary  government,  and  which  protects  the 
individual  against  all  its  departments.  The  new  constitution  of 
the  German  republic  contains  the  most  elaborate  bill  of  rights 
in  any  existing  state.  While  the  constitution  does  not  specifically 
grant  to  the  courts  the  power  to  set  aside  laws  that  encroach  upon 
the  constitutional  rights  guaranteed  to  the  individual,  it  does  pro- 
vide for  the  impeachment  before  the  supreme  judicial  court  of  the 
president,  chancellor,  and  ministers  for  any  wrongful  violation  of 
the  constitution.  In  addition,  a  constitutional  amendment  may  be 
proposed  and  voted  by  the  people  regardless  of  the  lawmaking 
bodies,  so  that  civil  rights  seem  amply  protected. 

In  conclusion,  it  must  be  noted  that  the  actual  freedom  which 
the  individual  enjoys  against  governmental  action  is  very  similar 
in  all  these  states,  although  legal  guarantee  against  arbitrary  action 
on  the  part  of  various  departments  of  government  differs.  .More- 
over, it  does  not  follow  that  the  state  that  establishes  the  most 
perfect  legal  safeguard  against  governmental  encroachment  gives 
the  greatest  amount  of  liberty  to  its  citizens.  Civil  liberty  in  Eng- 
land, though  created  by  the  legislature  and  legally  at  its  mercy,  is 
actually  wider  in  scope  than  that  granted  by  other  states  possessing 
constitutional  limitations  on  governmental  authority. 

56.  Content  of  civil  liberty.  In  so  far  as  individual  liberty  con- 
sists of  rights  and  immunities  created  and  maintained  by  the  state 
against  other  individuals,  it  has  existed  from  the  beginning  of 
political  life.  The  adjustment  of  man's  relations  to  his  fellows  was 
indeed  the  chief  purpose  for  which  the  state  arose.  Further  devel- 
opment consisted  in  making  these  rights  more  definite,  in  making 
governmental  enforcement  of  them  more  certain,  and  in  extending 
equal  rights  to  all  classes  in  the  state.  Definite  law,  sure  enforce- 
ment, and  equality  before  the  law  marked  the  advance  of  better 
organized  sovereignty  and  of  more  complete  liberty. 

In  so  far  as  individual  liberty  consists  of  immunity  from  gov- 
ernmental interference,  it  is  of  comparatively  recent  origin.  In 
ancient  states  the  whole  sovereign  power  was  vested  in  the  gov- 
ernment. Theocracy  and  despotism  crushed  individual  will,  and 


INDIVIDUAL  LIBERTY  115 

all  the  activities  of  man  were  subject  to  state  control.  In  the  Mid- 
dle Ages  governing  authority  resulted  from  ownership  of  land, 
and,  as  in  the  ancient  empires,  liberty  existed  only  in  so  far  as 
rulers  permitted.  It  was  not  until  modern  constitutional  states 
arose  that  the  idea  of  individual  liberty  as  a  sphere  into  which 
the  government  might  not  enter,  became  possible,  and  that  legal 
checks  were  placed  on  the  manner  and  extent  of  governmental 
action. 

The  elements  that  compose  individual  liberty  have  varied  in 
different  states  and  at  different  times.  In  general  the  growth 
of  popular  government  has  been  accompanied  by  an  expansion 
of  civil  liberty,  and  corresponding  limitations  on  governmental 
authority  have  secured  individual  welfare  and  stable  organization. 
In  the  more  advanced  modern  states  the  scope  of  individual 
liberty,  in  spite  of  legal  differences  in  the  nature  of  its  guarantee, 
is  practically  the  same.  Stated  broadly,  it  includes  : l 

1.  Freedom  of  the  person 

2.  Equality  before  the  law     ^ 

3.  Security  of  private  property     «- 

4.  Freedom  of  opinion  and  of  its  expression      __ 

5.  Freedom  of  conscience     +^- 

Making  due  allowance  for  minor  differences  in  various  states, 
and  for  such  limitations  as  general  welfare  demands,  these  may  be 
considered  as  rights  with  which  present  political  thought  believes 
government  should  not  interfere.  All  of  these  have  developed 
gradually ;  some  will  probably  be  extended,  others  may  be  nar- 
rowed ;  but,  in  general,  states  agree  that  a  certain  field  of  indi- 
vidual liberty  is  conducive  to  the  best  interests  of  both  citizen 
and  state. 

57.  Political  liberty.  As  already  indicated,  the  great  problem 
that  the  state,  in  its  evolution,  has  faced  is  a  satisfactory  adjust- 
ment of  sovereignty  and  liberty.  LTpon  its  solution  both  individual' 
welfare  and  state  existence  depend.  The  ideal  condition  requires 
a  sphere  of  civil  liberty  sufficient  to  secure  individual  interests, 
and  a  government  whose  commands  are  definitely  expressed  and 

1  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  p.  178. 


Il6          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

authoritatively  enforced.  At  the  same  time  there  must  be  the 
minimum  amount  of  friction  between  government  and  citizen,  in 
order  to  maintain  the  stability  of  the  state.  Various  political 
methods  and  devices  have  been  tried  in  the  effort  to  combine 
authority  and  freedom  ;  but  usually  they  have  tended  toward  des- 
potism or  toward  anarchy ;  and  the  state,  from  stagnation,  or 
revolution,  or  conquest,  has  perished.  The  system  that  thus  far 
has  been  most  satisfactory  places  sovereignty  and  Ubfir^  in  the 
same  hands ;  that  is,  it  gives  the  mass  of  the  people  not  only  a 
sphere  of  freedom,  but  also  a  share  in  authority.  Thus  they,  di- 
rectly or  indirectly,  as  government,  create  and  enforce  the  rights 
which  they  possess  as  citizens,  —  in  a  word,  they  govern  them- 
selves. This  type  of  political  life  is  called  democracy,  and  the 
right  to  share  in  authority  is  called  political  liberty  in  distinction 
to  civiiliberty,  which  is  the  right  to  protection  against  interference. 

The  establishment  of  political  liberty  has  been  the  most  impor- 
tant contribution  to  recent  political  growth.  Internal  order  and 
freedom  from  external  danger  had  been  secured  by  the^powerful 
organization  of  Rome ;  but  the  absence  of  local  self-government 
and  representation  created  a  great  gap  between  government  and 
citizen,  and  destroyed  liberty.  With  the  coming  of  the  Teutons 
extreme  liberty  or  anarchy  prevailed,  and  it  took  a  thousand  years 
to  restore  organization  and  authority.  By  the  sixteenth  century 
government  was  again  powerful,  but  a  conflict  of  interests  between 
kings  and  people  still  prevented  liberty.  At  the  same  time  a  new 
force  in  politics  was  growing.  Increasing  political  consciousness 
on  the  part  of  the  people  led  them  to  realize  their  power  and  to 
demand  a  share  in  government.  Since  that  time,  by  gradual 
process,  as  in  England,  or  by  revolution,  as  on  the  continent, 
constitutional  democracy  has  developed. 

It  was  soon  realized,  however,  that  the  people  needed  protection 
against  their  representatives,  and  against  hasty  prejudices  on  their 
own  part,  as  much  as  they  had  against  their  former  despotic  rulers. 
For  this  purpose  authority  was  divided  among  various  depart- 
ments of  government  and  each  made  a  check  on  the  functions  of 
the  others.  In  addition,  by  frequent  elections,  by  the  referendum, 
and  by  a  system  of  local  self-government,  the  mass  of  the  people 


INDIVIDUAL  LIBERTY  117 

retained  a  direct  share  in  political  power.  Finally,  by  written  con- 
stitutions, usually  difficult  to  change,  stability  of  organization  was 
secured  and  a  sphere  of  individual  freedom,  into  which  the  ordi- 
nary government  could  not  enter,  was  created.  In  this  way  modern 
states  reconcile  sovereignty  and  liberty.  Political  liberty  as  well  as 
^iyil  liberty  is  wide  in  extent,  and  the  conflict  between  authority 
and  freedom  is  largely  avoided,  since  rights  are  self-creaied  and 
self -enforced. 

Political  liberty  is  not  as  widespread  or  as  equally  distributed 
as  civil  liberty.  All  citizens  share  practically  alike  in  protection 
against  the  government  and  against  other  individuals,  and  even 
aliens  are  often  admitted  to  full  privileges  of  civil  liberty.  But 
political  expediency  demands  that  a  considerable  proportion  of  the 
state's  population  be  excluded,  from  political  rights,  and  that  within 
the  group  possessing  such  rights  considerable  differences  in  degree 
of  power  be  found.  Civil  liberty  may  be  enjoyed  alike  by  all ; 
political  authority  must  be  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  a  relatively 
limited  number. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  X 

REFERENCES 
NATURE  OF  LAW 
SOURCES  OF  LAW 

1.  CUSTOM 

2.  JUDICIAL  DECISIONS 

3.  SCIENTIFIC  COMMENTARIES 

4.  LEGISLATION 

a.  The  nature  of  legislative  authority 

b.  The  nature  of  law 
BASIS  OF  MODERN  LAW 

1.  ROMAN 

2.  TEUTONIC 
RIGHTS 

1.  PERSONS 

a.  Natural 

b.  Artificial 

2.  THINGS 

3.  FACTS 

a.  Acts 

b.  Events 
DIVISIONS  OF  LAW 

1.  AS  TO  MANNER  OF  STATEMENT 

a.  Statutes 

b.  Ordinances 

c.  Common  law 

d.  Constitutional  law 

e.  International  law 

2.  AS   TO   THE   PUBLIC   OR   PRIVATE   CHARACTER   OF   THE 

PERSONS   CONCERNED 

a.  Public  law 

(1)  Constitutional  law 

(2)  Administrative  law 

(3)  Criminal  law  and  procedure 

b.  Private  law 
LAW  AND  ETHICS 

118 


CHAPTER  X 
LAW 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Law 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  xii 

BRYCE,  J.  Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence,  Essays  II,  XI-XVI 

CLARKE,  R.  F.  The  Science  of  Law  and  Lawmaking 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  chaps,  xi,  xii 

HOLLAND,  T.  E.  Elements  of  Jurisprudence 

LEE,  G.  C.  Historical  Jurisprudence 

MAINE,  H.  Ancient  Law 

MARKBY,  W.  Elements  of  Law,  chaps,  i,  ii 

MOREY,  W.  C.  Outlines  of  Roman  Law 

POLLOCK,  F.  Essays  in  Jurisprudence  and  Ethics,  chaps,  i,  ii 

PULSZKY,  A.  Theory  of  Law  and  Civil  Society,  Part  III 

ROBERTSON,  E.  Article  "  Law,"  in  Encyclopedia  Britannica 

STEARNS,  J.  M.  Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of  England 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  chaps,  vii,  viii 

WILSON,  W.  The  State,  chaps,  iv,  v,  xiv 

58.  Nature  of  law.  The  term  "  law,"  in  ordinary  usage,  is  given 
a  variety  of  meanings.  It  is  often  applied  to  the  sequence  of  cause 
and  effect  in  the  world  of  phenomena.  In  this  sense  the  laws  of 
gravitation  and  of  chemical  reaction  are  examples.  Again,  the 
name  "  law  "  is  applied  to  rujesjor  the  guidance  of  human  conduct. 
If  these  are  concerned  with  motives  and  internal  acts  of  the  will, 
they  are  called  moral  laws.  If  theyTefer  to  outward  acts,  they  may 
be  either  social  or  political.  In  the  former  gase  they  are  enforced 
by  public  opinion,  and  their  violation  is  followed  by  social  disap- 
proval. In  the  latter  case  they  are  enforced  by  the  authority  of  the 
state,  and  their  violation  is  followed  by  penalties  politically  deter- 
mined and  applied.  It  is  law  in  this  latter  sense  alone,  usually 
known  as  positive  law,  with  which  political  science  deals.  It  con- 
siders lawjas  ajommand  is^ujedLby_Jli£_gtat£L.Rnri  enforced-by  its 
authority  over  all  its  citizensj  or,  as  defined  by  Holland,1  "  a 

1  Elements  of  Jurisprudence,  p.  40. 
ir9 


120         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

general  rule  of  external  human  action  enforced  by  a  sovereign 
political  authority." 

A  further  analysis  of  law  in  this  political,  or  positive,  sense  will 
more  clearly  establish  its  nature.  As  indicated  in  the  discussion 
of  sovereignty,  creation  and  enforcement  of  law  form  the  method 
by  which  states  manifest  their  sovereignty  in  its  internal  aspect. 
Accordingly,  no  legal  restriction  can  be  placed  on  the  lawmaking 
authority  of  the  state ;  and,  conversely,  no  authority  except  the 
state  can  cr§ate~law.  This  seems  clear  enough  when  applied  to 
law  formulated  by  legislation,  since  in  that  process  a  definite  state 
organ  is  seen  deliberately  expressing  the  state's  will.  Some  diffi- 
culty is  met,  however,  in  applying  the^idea  of  positive  law  to  those 
customs  that  are  enforced  by  the  courts ;  and  this  fact  has^etrthe 
Historical  School  to  deny  that  law  is  always  created  by  a  definite 
sovereign  body  in  the  state.  They  claim  that  custom  and  popular 
consent,  as  well  as  definite  political  authority,  create  law.  In  the 
main  their  objections  result  from  confusing  the  sources  from 
which  legal  principles  have  sprung,  and  the  sanction  that  enforces 
them.  It  is  true  that  custom  was  for  a  long  time  the  only  source 
of  law,  and  is  still  an  important  influence.  At  the  same  time,  the 
principles  handed  down  by  custom  do  not  become  law,  in  the  polit- 
ical sense,  until  sanctioned  by  the  state.  "  The  sole  source  of  laws, 
in  the  sense  of  that  which  impresses  upon  them  their  legal  char- 
acter, is  their  recognition  by  the  state,  which  may  be  given  either 
expressly  through  the  legislature  or  the  courts,  or  tacitly  by  allow- 
ance, followed  in  the  last  resort  by  enforcement."  1 

Enforcement  by  the  state  is,  then,  the  distinguishing  character- 
istic of  law.  From  this  it  follows  that  all  laws  are  equal  in  validity^ 
Each  lawmaking  organ,  acting  within  the  sphere  of  its  legal  com- 
petence, shares  in  exercising  sovereign  power.  The  sum  total  of 
these  bodies  forms  the  sovereign  ;  the  sum  total  of  the  principles 
they  enforce  forms  the  law  of  the  state.  An  ordinance  issued  by 
some  minor  department  is,  if  the  issuing  body  has  a  legal  right  so 
to  act,  as  truly  law  as  legally  created  constitutional  amendments. 
When  a  law  is  declared  unconstitutional  it  is  not  meant  that  the 
law,  conflicting  with  a  superior  law,  is  annulled ;  but  that,  created 

1  Holland,  Elements  of  Jurisprudence,  p.  54. 


LAW  I 2  I 

by  a  body  acting  outside  the  scope  of  its  legal  powers,  it  never 
was  law.  _JLaw  may  therefore  be  defined  as  the  command  of 
an  authorized  public  organ  acting  within  the  sphere  of  its  legal 
competence.  This  views  every  state  as  completely  organized  in 
its  government,  and  gives  a  clear-cut  meaning  to  sovereignty 
and  law. 

59.  Sources  of  law.  Law,  as  the  expression  of  the  state's  will, 
follows  the  same  general  course  of  development  as  the  state  itself. 
A  historical  survey  of  the  manner  in  which  legal  principles  have 
arisen  will  therefore  both  add  clearness  to  our  knowledge  of  state 
evolution  and  further  explain  the  nature  of  law.  The  sources  of 
law  may  be  outlined  as  follows  : 

1 .  Custom.    Rules  of  conduct  resting  upon  general  acceptance, 
resulting  either  from  accidental  habits,  from  evident  utility,  or  from 
general  desire  for  order  and  justice,  were  the  only  laws  known  to 
primitive  man.    To  the  sanction  resulting  from  immemorial  usage 
was  added  religious  authority,  since  law  and  religion  were  not  dis- 
tinguished and  all  rules  rested  upon  the  same  sanction.    Evidently 
no  direct  action  of  the  state  was  involved  in  the  creation  of  such 
principles.   As  long  as  social  relations  were  simple  and  common 
interests  few,  all  knew  the  common  rules ;  and  the  personal  vio- 
lence that  resulted  from  nonobservance  was  not  a  serious  menace 
to  such  order  as  then  existed. 

Under  changing  conditions,  however,  such  as  resulted  from  new 
environment,  new  methods  of  life,  or  contact  with  other  peoples, 
several  difficulties  arose.  More  numerous  controversies  led  to 
doubts  as  to  the  relative  validity  of  conflicting  customs,  and  new 
cases  came  up  concerning  which  custom  furnished  no  rule.  The 
evils  of  uncertain  public  opinion  and  the  injustice  of  the  strong 
when  customary  rules  were  absent  led  to  an  additional  source  of 
law,  namely, 

2.  Judicial  decision.    The  state  arose  not  as  the  creator  of  law, 
but  as  the  interpreter  and  enforcer  of  custom.    Disputed  points 
were  referred  naturally  to  men  of  recognized  importance,  who  had 
authority  to  enforce  their  decisions.    In  this  way  the  magistrate 
or  judge,  supported  by  the  force  of  the  community,  inaugurated 
political  power.   While,  in  theory,  each  case  was  decided  on  its 


122          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

merits  by  applying  long-standing  custom,  in  several  ways  the  de- 
cisions of  magistrates  created  new  law.  In  deciding  similar  cases 
general  rules  were  established,  precedent  was  followed,  and,  either 
unconsciously  or  deliberately,  the  law  was  modified  and  expanded. 
Under  changing  conditions  former  customs  worked  injustice,  and 
decisions  often  created  new  principles  by  means  of  strained  con- 
structions or  legal  fictions.  Finally,  where  no  rule  existed,  general 
principles  of  equity  were  applied,  still  under  the  guise  of  judicially 
interpreting  laws  already  in  existence.  The  decisions  of  the  Roman 
praetor  and  of  the  English  chancellor  are  examples  of  law  thus 
created.  In  these  ways,  as  social  life  developed,  the  strictness  and 
rigidity  of  old  customs  were  modified,  the  f unctions  ~o£~the_ state 
were  extended,  and  its  authority  was  made  moj^delinite  in 
expression  and  more  certain  in  enforcement. 

3.  Scientific  commentaries.    The  carefully  formed  opinions  of 
great  jurists  have  often  been  considered  decisive,  as  in  the  authority 
of  the  Roman  jurisconsults,  or  the  modern  respect  for  Coke,  Black- 
stone,  and  Kent.    In  other  ways  their  influence  has  been  great,  if 
less  direct.    What  lawmakers  and  courts  deal  with  in  piecemeal 
fashion  legal  science  views  as  a  complete  system  capable  of  scien- 
tific treatment.    By  collecting  and  arranging  in  logical  form  past 
customs,  decisions,  and  laws,  writers  on  law  are  able  to  arrive  at 
general  principles  which  may  serve  as  a  basis  for  further  enact- 
ment, to  indicate  the  gaps  that  need  filling  in,  and,  in  so  far  as 
their  ideas  are  enforced  by  the  courts,  to  create  law. 

4.  Legislation.    The  idea  of  deliberately  creating  law,  the  most 
important  function  of  modern  states,  is  comparatively  recent.    Two 
lines  of  growth  in  its  development  may  be  noted  : 

(a)  The  nature  of  legislative  authority.  At  first  magistrates  and 
priests  alone  could  create  law.  Representing  the  power  of  God  or 
the  majesty  of  the  state,  father  and  king,  or,  later,  praetor  and 
archon,  were  lawgivers.  In  the  Roman  Empire  the  emperor  was 
the  source  of  all  law ;  when  national  states  arose  their  kings 
claimed  the  same  prerogative,  and  in  some  states  to-day,  in  legal 
phraseology  at  least,  laws  are  issued  by  the  crown.  During  this 
process  assemblies  of  freemen,  whose  consent  and  support  were 
needed  on  important  questions,  gradually  established  themselves 


LAW 


I23 


as  part  of  the  government,  and  by  various  methods  secured  the 
right  to  initiate,  as  well  as  indorse,  new  laws.  The  assemblies  in 
Greece  and  in  Rome  and  the  early  Teutonic  moots  represented 
this  stage.  Finally,  the  system  of  representation,  begun  in  Eng- 
land, furnished  a  device  that  enabled  the  growing  idea  of  popular 
sovereignty  to  manifest  itself  effectively ;  and,  in  modern  states, 
legislation  is  controlled  by  representative  bodies. 

(b)  The  nature  of  law.  For  a  long  time  the  lawmaking  powers  of 
government  dealt  almost  entirely  with  public-Jaw,  adjusting  the  rela- 
tion of  citizens  and  state,  and  leaving  the  regulation  of  the  private 
interests  of  individuals  to  custom  and  the  judiciary.  Only  gradu- 
ally, even  after  representative  assemblies  arose,  did  they  attempt 
more  than  a  general  control  of  public  administration.  However, 
as  the  basis  of  representation  widened,  and  the  people,  in  their 
growing  political  consciousness,  realized  their  power,  it  was  inevi- 
table that,  through  their  representatives,  they  should  enter  on  a 
constantly  extending  field  of  legislation.  Private  as  well  as  public 
interests  were  regulated,  other  lawmaking  bodies  with  delegated 
powers  were  created,  and  the  present  enormous  legislative  activity 
was  begun.  The  growth  of  popular  representative  government 
and  the  idea  that  the  state  manifests  its  sovereignty  in  detailed 
legislation  are  closely  interrelated. 

At  present  legislation  is  almost  the  only  source  of  law.  Custom 
and  equity  are  being  replaced  by  definite  enactment ;  judicial  de- 
cisions are  limited  by  codification,  and  scientific  commentary  does 
little  except  discuss  cases.  While  the  other  sources  are  present, 
they  tend  increasingly  to  be  swallowed  up  in  legislation.  Rigid 
custom,  which,  when  unaltered,  caused  ancient  states  to  stagnate, 
has  been  replaced  by  a  craze  for  lawmaking,  which  sometimes 
threatens  to  go  too  far  in  the  other  direction.  At  the  same  time 
custom  still  serves  as  a  check  onjradical  action.  Laws  no  longer 
needed  become  obsolete,  usages' grow  up  outside  the  legal  system, 
and  public  opinion  constantly  influences  both  the  formulation  and 
the  administration  of  law.  Traditions  of  the  past,  as  w^ll  as  needs 
for  th&future,  affect  the  creation  ot^Iaw". 

60.  Basis  of  modern  law.  Modern  systems  of  law  arose  from 
the  fusion  of  Roman  and  ^Teutonic  polity  after  the  barbarian 


124         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

invasions  of  the  fifth  century.1  Though  somewhat  influenced  by 
Roman  civilization  before  entering  the  Empire,  Teutonic  legal 
ideas  showed  marked  contrasts  to  those  of  Rome.  The  chief  dif- 
ferences may  be  summed  up  as  follows :  To  the  Romans  law 
meant  the  commands  of  the  state  issued  through  its  officials ; 
among  the  Teutons  immemorial  custom  of  popular  origin  was 
law.  Roman  law  was.l>ased  on  allegiance  to  the  state ;  Teutonic 
law  rested  on  personal  allegiance.  Over  the  Roman  Empire  a 
uniform  law  was  enforced  on  all  citizens  ;  among  the  Teutons  law 
was  a  personal  possession,  differing  from  tribe  to  tribe,  and  taken, 
as  a  part  of  his  belongings,  wherever  its  owner  might  go.  To  the 
advanced  but  rigid  Roman  code  the  Teutons  therefore  contrll> 
uted  new  elements  and  the  possibility  of  further  growth.  The 
immediate  result  of  contact  was  legal  confusion.  Numerous  sys- 
tems, often  contradictory,  existed  side  by  side.  The  Teutons, 
retaining  their  customs,  made  little  effort  to  destroy  the  old  laws 
of  the  Empire.  In  addition,  by  the  canon  law  of  the  church  and 
the  local  regulations  of  manor  and  guild,  legal  ideas  as  to  both 
sanction  and  content  were  further  complicated. 

Gradually,  however,  Roman  methods  systematized  this  mass  of 
custom.  Several  means  by  which  Roman  law  was  diffused  over 
Europe  may  be  mentioned.  During  the  Dark  Ages  various  codes, 
containing,  in  the  main,  Roman  principles,  were  drawn  up  at  the 
command  of  barbarian  leaders.  Of  these  the  most  important  was 
the  code  of  the  Vis|gpths.  known  as  the  Breviary  of  Alaric.  This 
compilation,  prepared  early  in  the  sixth  century,  remained  the 
chief  source  of  Roman  law  for  Europe  until  the  eleventh  and 
twelfth  centuries.  About  that  time,  in  the  Italian  cities  where 
population  was  mixed  and  trade  vigorous,  need  arose  for  more 
comprehensive  regulation.  In  the  great  compilation  of  Justinian 
was  found  a  system  suited  to  the  needs  of  the  time,  and  schools 
were  rapidly  established  for  its  study.  Starting  in  the  University 
of  Bologna,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eleventh  century,  interest  in 
Roman  law  spread  to  other  Italian  cities,  thence  to  France^and 
Spain,  and  later  to  Holland.  Even  in  England  the  study  of 
Roman  law  obtained  for  several  centuries.  From  these  schools 

1  Wilson,  The  State,  chap.  v. 


LAW 


125 


lawyers,  steeped  in  Roman  ideas,  returned  to  their  homes,  and, 
supported  by  the  kings,  whose  desire  for  centralization  they 
favored,  soon  replaced  customary  rules  with  Roman  principles 
and  procedure. 

To  this  process  the  influence  of  the  church  must  be  added.  In 
organization  and  spirit  it  was  Roman.  It  had  a  well-developed 
system  of  canon  law  and  courts  ;  and,  by  its  control  of  education, 
it  furnished  the  advisers  of  rulers  and  the  compilers  of  codes.  Its 
authority  was  therefore  cast  on  the  side  of  Roman  methods,  par- 
ticularly in  family  relations  and  inheritance.  The  prevalence  of 
Latin  as  the  speech  of  education  and  of  business  also  furthered 
the  acceptance  of  Roman  legal  ideas. 

As  the  countries  of  continental  Europe  arose  from  feudalism 
Roman  law  increasingly  served  as  the  basis  for  their  national  unity. 
Attempts  to"  secure  uniformity  and  to  enforce  the  king's  law  as 
the  law  of  the  land,  the  growing  influence  of  lawyers,  trained  in 
Roman  law,  as  the  popular  courts  decayed,  and  the  influence  of 
the  church  all  tended  in  the  same  direction.  Everywhere  evidences 
of  fusion  may  be  found,  but  in  general  the  legal  sy_stems  of  con- 
tinental Europe  rest  on  Roman  jurisprudence.  A"TTT6st  direct 
influence  was  exerted  by  the  Code  Napoleon  (1804).  This  con- 
sisted of  the  ancient  customs  of  France,  of  Roman  law  maxims, 
and  of  the  principles  and  legislation  of  the  French  Revolution, 
revised  and  harmonized  by  a  commission  of  eminent  French  jurists. 
By  French  control  and  influence  this  code  was  introduced  into 
Holland,  Italy,  Spain,  and  many  of  the  German  states.  Austria  and 
Prussia  imitated  it,  and  from  Spain  it  spread  to  Spanish  America. 
England,  cut  off  from  the  rest  of  Europe,  and  possessing,  from  the 
Norman  Conquest,  a  centralized  administration,  was  able  to  work 
out  a  uniform  legal  system  based  on  Teutonic  customs.  Even  in 
England  the  influence  of  Roman  law  was  felt.  For  four  centuries 
England  was  governed  as  a  Roman  province ;  later,  Roman  law 
was  taught  in  her  universities ;  and  many  precepts  and  methods 
were  brought  from  Rome  through  the  church.  At  the  same  time 
English  law  and  the  law  of  those  states,  such  as  the  United  States, 
that  have  derived  their  jurisprudence  from  English  sources,  are 
essentially  based  on  the  customary  usages  of  the  early  Teutons. 


126          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

It  should  be  noted  also  that  important  Hebraic  elements  have 
been  introduced  into  modern  law,  particularly  at  two  periods.  Dur- 
ing the  Middle  Ages  the  union  of  church  and  state  and  the 
important  governing  functions  that  the  church  performed,  resulted 
in  a  considerable  mingling  of  Christian  theology  with  politics. 
Again,  after  the  Reformation,  Protestant  ideas,  particularly  those 
of  the  Puritans,  were  infused  into  politics  and  influenced  the 
growth  of  modern  democracy. 

In  conclusion  it  may  be  noted  that,  in  general,  Teutonic  prin- 
ciples  predominated  in  public  law :  Roman,  in  private  law\  The 
Teutons,  as  conquerors,  formed  their  governments  on  the  basis  of 
those  customs  with  which  they  were  familiar,  laying  the  founda- 
tion for  local  self-government  and  representation.  Even  wheje 
Roman  ideas  were  adopted  later  these  elements  were  never  com- 
pletely destroyed.  On  the  other  hand,  Roman  law  was  soon  ap- 
plied to  relations  among  individuals.  It  was  along  this  line  that 
Rome  had  most  perfectly  developed  her  system,  and  its  superi- 
ority, especially  under  their  new  environment,  was  soon  recognized 
by  the  invading  Teutons.  In  municipal  and  colonial  administration, 
also,  the  influence  of  Rome  was  powerful.  With  these  the  Teu- 
tons were  not  familiar,  and  their  customs  were  accordingly  silent. 
On  the  contrary,  Roman  ideas  remained  least  changed  in  the 
towns ;  and  toward  the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages,  when  city  life 
again  became  important,  Roman  municipal  government  reappeared. ' 
Later,  when  colonial  empires  were  formed,  it  was  again  to  the  ex- 
perience of  Rome  that  the  states  of  Europe  unconsciously  turned. 
Finally,  many  survivals  in  political  point  of  view  may  still  be 
observed,  distinguishing  those  states  whose  jurisprudence  is  pre- 
dominantly Roman  from  those  whose  legal  ideas  are  fundamen- 
tally Teutonic  ;  and  these  differences  can  be  explained  only  by 
the  historic  development  of  their  respective  legal  systems. 

61.  Rights.  When  the  "  general  rules  of  external  human  action 
enforced  by  sovereign  political  authorities,"  called  laws,  are  applied 
to  individuals,  it  is  seen  that  the  state  sanctions  only  such  acts  as 
are  in  accordance  with  its  will,  and  punishes,  or  at  least  nullifies, 
acts  contrary  to  its  will.  In  other  words,  the  state  announces  what 
it  will  protect  as  legal  rights,  what  it  will  enforce  as  legal  duties, 


LAW 


127 


and  what  method  it  will  use  in  so  doing.  The  maintenance  of 
rights,  with  their  corresponding  duties,  is,  therefore,  the  object  for 
which  law  exists.1  That  law  which  creates  rights  is  called  $"•?*$({>**— 
tive  law,  while  that  law  which  provides  a  method  of  protecting 
rights  is  called  adjective  law,  Q^^rgcjLdiize . 

In  discussing  individual  liberty  2  the  nature  of  a  legal  right  was 
indicated.  There  remain  to  be  considered  its  component  elements, 
which  are  : 

1.  The  person  who  possesses  the  right,  or  who  is  benefited  by 
its  existence. 

2.  In  some  cases,  the  object  over  which  the  right  is  exercised. 

3.  The  acts  or  forbearances  which  the  person  possessing  the 
right  is  entitled  to  demand. 

4.  The  person  from  whom  these  acts  or  forbearances  can  be 
exacted,  or  whose  duty  it  is  to  act  or  forbear. 

In  this  series  two  terms  are  persons,  —  one  entitled  by  the  right, 
the  other  obliged  by  the  right.  The  other  terms  may  be  called  the 
thing  and  the  act.  When  a  right  is  put  into  operation,  events, 
which  occur  independent  of  the  persons  concerned  and  yet  which 
influence  the  right,  may  intervene. 

The  final  analysis  of  a  legal  right,  therefore,  shows  : 

1.  persons.    Either  human  beings,  called  natural  persons,  or 
groups  of  human  beings  or  masses  of  property  to  which  the  law 
gives  rights  and  duties,  called  artificial  persons.    Corporations  and 
the  state  itself  are  examples  of  this  latter  class. 

2.  Things.  Either  jpateriaL_ohjects,  such  as  real  and  personal 
property,  or  intellectualjobjects,  such  as  a  patent  or  copyright. 

3-  F&CJ&?  These  may  be  : 

(a)  Acts.    Deliberate  outward  actions  or  deliberate  forbearances 
from  action. 

(b)  Events.    Movements  of  external  nature  or  the  acts  of  per- 
sons other  than  those  concerned  with  the  right. 

This  analysis  opens  up  the  whole  field  of  law  and  serves  as  the 
basis  for  its  division  into  (i)  law  of  persons,  and  (2)  law  of  things, 
which  some  writers,  such  as  Blackstone  and  Austin,  consider  the 
fundamental  classification  of  law, 

1  Holland,  Elements  of  Jurisprudence,  chaps,  vii,  viii.       2  See  Chapter  IX. 


128         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

62.  Divisions  of  law.  Law  may  be  classified  on  the  basis  of 
numerous  canons  of  distinction.  For  the  purposes  of  political 
science  several  of  these  are  important  as  indicating  more  clearly 
the  nature  of  state,  sovereignty,  and  law  : 

1 .  A s  to  the  manner  of  statement.    If  the  entire  body  of  legal 
principles  in  a  modern  state  be  analyzed,  it  will  show  the  following 
elements,  differing  in  the  main  as  to  the  mode  in  which,  or  the 
persons  through  whom,  it  has  been  formulated  : 

(a)  Those  principles  that  have  been  formally  enacted  by  the 
legislative  bodies  of  the  state.    These  form  the  bulk  of  existing^ 
law  and  are  called  statutes. 

(b)  Those  "  commands  of  limitedarjrjlication   not  necessarily 
permanent,  and  usually  issued  as  administrative  directions  by~some 
department  of  government."  l    These  are  called  ordinances. 

(c)  That  body  of  legal  principles  that  is  enforced  by  the  courts, 
but  whose  origin  rests  on  custom  rather  than  on  formal  legislation. 
This  is  called  common  law. 

(d)  Those  fundamental  principles  that  create  government,  out- 
line the  scope  of  its  powers,  and  prescribe  the  method  of  their 
exercise.    In  some  states  at  least  these,  when  written,  are  not  for- 
mulated by  the  ordinary  lawmaking  body  and  cannot  be  altered  by 
ordinary  procedure.    They  form  constitutional  law. 

(e)  Those  general  rules  that  are  observed  by  states  in  their 
dealings  with  other  states  are  called  inter?iajionalla^w^j^&^t  as 
will  be  seen  later,2  differ  from  the  preceding  not  only  in  manner 
of  statement  but  also  in  sanction,  and  are  not  to  be  considered  law 
in  the  proper  sense  of  the  term. 

A  fundamental  cross-classification  of  law  rests  on  a  distinction 
already  indicated  between  the  relations  of  man  to  man,  and  of  man 
to  the  state.  Consequently  law  may  be  classified  : 

2.  As  to  the  public  or  private  character  of  the  persons  concerned. 
From  this  standpoint  the  basic  division  is  into  : 

(a)  Public    law,   which   regulates   the   relations   of    state   and 
individual. 

(b)  Private  law,  which  regulates  the'  relation  of  individual  and 
individual.  fc" 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  214.  2  See  section  68. 


LAW 


129 


In  public  law  the  state  is  directly,  or  indirectly  through  some 
part  of  its  government,  one  of  the  parties  to  the  right  created  by 
the  law,  at  the  same  time  being  the  power  that  creates  and  en- 
forces the  law.  If  the  individual  is  the  offender,  the  state  may  of 
course  protect  its  rights.  But  if  the  state  is  the  offender,  the 
individual  may  protect  his  rights  only  with  the  consent  of  the 
state,  since  no  rights  can  be  enforced  against  the  state.  Public 
law  deals  with  the  organization  and  functions  of  the  state, 
and  with  its  relations  to  its  citizens.  Its  most  important  sub- 
divisions are : 

(1)  Constitutional  law,  which  defines  the  organization  of  the 
state  and  outlines  the  scope  and  manner  of  exercise  of  govern- 
mental powers.    In  a  word,  it  locates  sovereignty  within  the  state 
and  thus  indicates  the  source  of  all  law. 

(2)  Administrativejgw,  which  defines  in  detail  the  manner  in 
which  the  government  shall  exercise  those  powers  that  were  out- 
lined in  constitutional  law.    Or,  in  a  narrower  sense,  it  is  "  that 
part  of  the  public  law  which  fixes  the  organization  and  determines 
the  competence  of  the  admnns^ratiy^ajjihorities,  and  indicates  to 
the  individual  remedies  for  the  violation  of  his  rights."  * 

(3)  Criminal    law^ajd    procedure.    In    maintaining   order   the 
state  punishes*  injuries  to  itself  and  disobedience  to  such  rules  as 
it  formulates  for  general  welfare.    That  branch  of  law  which  defines 
the  acts  that  infringe  upon  the  rights  of  the  state,  and  provides 
penal  consequences,  is  called  criminal  law.    That  body_jDf_rul£S 
defining  the  method  in  which  the  machinery  of  the  state  is  set  in 
motion  to  punish  offenders  is  called  criminalprocedufe. 

The  idea  of  criminal  law  is  comparatively  modern.  At  first, 
offenses  against  the  state  were  punished  by  special  laws,  and 
offenses  against  individuals,  even  if  they  threatened  general  wel- 
fare, were  considered  as  private  acts,  to  be  avenged  by  individuals 
or  compensated  for  by  money  payments.  The  state,  entering  as 
the  arbiter  that  enforced  fair  play,  later  came  to  consider  certain 
acts  as  offenses  both  against  other  individuals  and  against  itself ; 
and  gradually  a  body  of  rules  appeared  concerning  acts,  both 
against  the  state  and  against  other  individuals,  indirectly  affecting 

1  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  p.  8. 


130          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  general  welfare.  With  this  came  the  idea  that  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  state  to  prevent  and  punish  such  offenses. 

In  private  law  both  parties  concerned  are  private  individuals, 
while  the  state  occupies  the  position  of  arbiter.  It  creates  the  law 
and  enforces  it  impartially,  thus  securing  to  each  citizen  his  rights 
against  other  citizens.  Among  its  most  important  subdivisions  may 
be  mentioned  the  law  of  contracts,  of  property,  of  torts,  of  inherit- 
ance, etc.  While  forming  a  most  important  part  of  the  science  of 
law,  a  discussion  of  these  topics  has  no  place  in  political  science.  \J 

Public  and  private  law,  taken  together,  are  called  municipal  law, 
and  are  characterized  by  the  presence  of  an  enforcing  authority. 
In  public  law  the  state  is  both  an  interested  party  and  the  enforc- 
ing authority ;  in  private  law  the  state~ls"the  enforcing  authority 
only.  In  contrast  to  these  laws,  which  regulate  the  relations  of 
man  to  state  and  of  man  to  man,  may  be  mentioned  the  rules  that 
regulate  the  dealings  of  state  with  state,  called  international  law. 
For  these,  except  as  their  principles  are  incorporated  into  munici- 
pal law,  no  enforcing  authority  exists ;  and,  according  to  our  defi- 
nition, they  are,  properly  speaking,  not  law.  In  a  word,  since  the 
state  is  internally  sovereign,  municipal  law  is  law ;  since  the  state 
is  externally  sovereign,  international  law  is jzggjaw. 

63.  Law  and  ethics.  Law  and  ethics,  wfiile  closely  related,  must 
be  clearly  distinguished.  The  difference  in  sanction  has  already 
been  indicated.  Moral  rules  are  enforced  by  individual  conscience 
or  by  the  disapproval  of  public  opinion.  Law  is  enforced  by  the 
power  of  the  state.  There  is,  however,  a  difference  in  content  as 
well.  Ethics  deals  with  the  whole  life  of  man,  his  thoughts  and 
motives  as  well  as  his  actions.  Law  is  concerned  only  with  out- 
ward acts.  Of  these  it  attempts  to  control  only  such  as  affect  the 
welfare  of  men  in  society,  and  as  can  be  brought  under  uniform 
and  practicable  regulation.  It  necessarily  follows  that  many  things 
considered  morally  wrong  are  not  prohibited  by  law.  Falsehood, 
unless  under  oath  or  in  fraudulent  contracts,,  is  immoral  but  not 
illegal.  Ingratitude,  jealousy,  meanness,  are  indications  of  bad 
character,  but  do  not  come  under  the  cognizance  of  law  unless 
actual  injury  to  others  can  be  proved.  On  the  other  hand,  law 
often  follows  standards  of  expediency,  and  things  not  considered 


LAW  1 3 1 

Tiorally  wrong  are  forbidden  by  law.  Rapid  driving  is  hardly  im- 
moral, yet  in  the  congested  streets  of  large  cities  it  becomes  a 
social  danger  and  is  prohibited.  Peddling  milk  without  a  license 
involves  no  moral  issue,  yet  is  forbidden  in  most  cities.  There  is, 
thus,  a  legal  conscience  as  well  as  a  moral  conscience,  and  they  do 
not  always  coincide.  Some  persons  prefer  to  be  martyrs .  to  the 
law  rather  than  to  forsake  their  moral  opinions ;  others  disregard 
morality  so  long  as  they  can  keep  on  the  safe  side  of  the  law. 

There  is,  nevertheless,  a  close  connection  between  law  and  eth.- 
ics.  In  origin  they  were  identical,  both'  arising  as  the  result  of 
TJabit  and  experience  in  that  primitive  social  life  when  moral  "and 
political  ideas  were  not  separated.  Even  after  the  state  became'a 
distinct  institution,  and  laws,  as  definite  sovereign  commands,  were 
distinguished  from  moral  precepts,  points  of  contact  remained. 
Widespread  ideas  of  right  and  wrong,  representing  prevalent  eth- 
ical standards,  always  tend  to  be  crystallized  into  law.  To  be  effec- 
tive, law  must  represent  national  habits  and  beliefs.  Laws  that  at- 
tempt too  soon  to  force  new  moral  ideas,  or  laws  that  are  no  longer 
in  touch  with  existing  ethical  conditions,  are  alike  difficult  to  ad- 
minister. The  nonenforcement  of  temperance  or  child-labor  legis- 
lation is  an  example  of  the  former ;  certain  ancient,  but  unrepealed, 
Sabbath  observance  laws  illustrate  the  latter.  In  this  sense  law 
marks  time  to  moral  progress.  There  is  always  a  mass  of  public 
opinion  clamoring  for  legal  expression,  and  a  body  of  law  becom- 
ing obsolete  because  inapplicable  under  existing  conditions.  Only 
such  law  as  has  the  support  of  moral  sentiment  will  be  respected 
and  obeyed,  or,  if  necessary,  efficiently  enforced. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XI 

REFERENCES 
INTERNATIONAL  RELATIONS 

HISTORY  OF  INTERNATIONAL  RELATIONS 

1.  FROM  EARLIEST  TIMES  TO  THE  ESTABLISHMENT  O^  THE  RO- 

MAN   EMPIRE 

2.  FROM  THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE  TO  THE  REFORMATION 

3.  FROM  THE  REFORMATION  TO  THE  PRESENT  TIME 

SOURCES  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 

1.  ROMAN  LAW 

2.  WORKS  OF  GREAT  WRITERS 

3.  TREATIES  AND  CONVENTIONS 

a.  As  to  territory 

b.  As  to  sovereignty 

c.  As  to  conduct 

4.  INTERNATIONAL  CONFERENCES  AND  ARBITRATION  TRIBUNALS 

5.  THE  MUNICIPAL  LAW  OF  STATES 

6.  DIPLOMATIC  CORRESPONDENCE  :  STATE  PAPERS 

PARTIES  TO  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 

1.  SOVEREIGN  STATES 

2.  NONSOVEREIGN  POLITICAL  ORGANIZATIONS 

3.  CORPORATIONS 

4.  INDIVIDUALS 

NATURE  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 


'3* 


CHAPTER  XI 
RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  STATE 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  ix 

BRYCE,  J.  The  Holy  Roman  Empire,  chaps,  vii,  xv,  xxi 

COOLIDGE,  A.  C.  The  United  States  as  a  World  Power 

CRANE,  R.  T.  The  State  in  Constitutional  and  International  Law,  chaps,  iv,  vi,  vii 

DAVIS,  G.  B.  Elements  of  International  Law,  chap,  i 

HALL,  W.  E.  International  Law,  Introduction,  Part  I 

LAWRENCE,  T.  J.  The  Principles  of  International  Law,  pp.  1-54 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  89-99 

REINSCH,  P.  S.  World  Politics,  chap,  i 

SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chaps,  xv-xviii 

WALKER,  T.  A.  History  of  the  Law  of  Nations 

WESTLAKE,  J.  International  Law,  chaps,  ii-v 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  pp.  198-204 

WILSON,  W.  The  State,  paragraphs  1457-1459 

64.  International  relations.  Since  sovereignty,  the  essence 
of  the  state,  includes  (i)  .absolute  authority  over  all  individuals 
within  the  state,  and  (2)  absolute  independence  from  all  authority 
outside  the  state,  it  necessarily  follows  that  there  can  be  no  coercive 
authority  that  binds  two  or  more  states.  Such  a  condition  would 
of  itself  destroy  the  sovereignties  of  the  states,  and  therefore  the 
states  themselves.  In  actual  fact,  however,  many  things  tend  to 
bring  states  into  closer  relations.  Common  language  and  literature, 
common  culture  and  science,  common  ideas  of  right  and  wrong, 
and  especially  the  recent  remarkable  growth  of  trade  and  travel,  - 
all  these  create  ties  of  mutual  interest  and  increase  the  dealings 
of  state  with  state.  As  these  bonds  of  union  become  more  numer- 
ous the  relations  of  states  to  one  another,  both  in  peace  and  in 
war,  tend  to  conform  more  and  more  to  a  definite  code.  These 
rules  which  determine  the  conduct  of  the  general  body  of  civi- 
ized  states  in  their  dealings  with  one  another  are  called  inter- 
national law. 

133 


134 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


65.  History  of  international  relations.  While  international  law 
proper  is  less  than  three  hundred  years  old,  most  of  its  funda- 
mental principles  had  their  origin  in  earlier  periods,  and  some  can 
be  traced  even  to  the  political  communities  of  Greece  and  Rome. 
International  law,  in  its  development,  may  be  divided  into  three 
periods,1  in  each  of  which  a  certain  idea  of  interstate  relations 
predominated : 

1 .  From  earliest  times  to  the  establishment  of  the  Roman  Em- 
pire.   States  had  no  rights  and  owed  no  obligations  unless  of  the 
same  race. 

2.  From  the  Roman  Empire  to  the  Reformation.    Relations  of 
states  must  be  regulated  by  a  common  superior. 

3.  From  the  Reformation  to  the  present  time.    States  are  inde- 
pendent and  equal,  having  mutual  rights  and  obligations.    It  need 
scarcely  be  mentioned  that,  as  in  all  historic  development,  each 
period  shades  off  gradually  into  the  one  that  follows. 

1.  First  period.    Oriental  nations  knew  little  of  one  another. 
Their  dealings  were  chiefly  in  unregulated  war.    While  the  Greeks 
had  commercial  relations  with  other  peoples,  sent  ambassadors, 
and  made  treaties  anc}  alliances,  yet  all  foreigners  were  considered 
"  barbarians,"  to  whom  no  duties  were  owed.    Even  so  advanced  a 
thinker  as  Aristotle  considered  that  they  were  intended  by  nature 
for  slaves.2   Among  the  Greeks  themselves  war  was  cruel,  and 
breach  of  faith  common.    A  maritime  code,  which  was  developed 
by  Rhodes,  and  which  formed  the  basis  for  later  commercial  codes, 
was  probably  their  greatest  contribution.    In  th^  earlier  period  of 
Roman  development  traces  of  international  regulation  were  found 
in  the  ju^feciale,  enforced  by  a  semireligious  college  that  gave 
advice  on  questions  of  peace  and  war,  and  acted  as  heralds  and 
ambassadors.   As  Rome  became  an  empire  and  included  the  whole 
civilized  world,  international  relations  became  impossible,  although 
certain  Roman  legai  concepts,  such  as  the  jus  gentium,  played  an 
important  part  in  the  later  rise  of  international  law. 

2.  Second  period.    The  extension  of  Rome's  power  over  all  the 
world  had  accustomed  men  to  the  idea  of  one  absolute  authority ; 

1  Lawrence,  The  Principles  of  International  Law,  Part  I,  chap.  iii. 

2  Politics,  Bk.  I,  chaps,  ii,  vi. 


RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  STATE 


135 


and,  even  after  the  fall  of  Rome,  this  ideal  remained  in  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire  and  in  the  papacy,  each  of  which  was,  in  theory, 
world-wide  in  scope  and  absolute  in  power.  The  permanence  of 
the  imperial  title  when  its  authority  had  become  a  mere  shadow, 
and  the  actual  influence  that  the  pope  was  able  to  exert,  show  the 
strength  of  this  concept  in  the  medieval  mind.  Toward  the  end 
of  the  Middle  Ages  the  idea  of  a  common  superior  was  attacked 
by  several  movements,: 

(a)  The  quarrel  between  emperor  and  pope  divided  Europe  into 
rival  camps  and  weakened  the  power  of  both  claimants  for  supreme 
authority.  » 

(b)  The  Reformation  removed  the  claims  of  the  pope  over  a 
large  part  of  Europe. 

(c)  The  rise  of  modern  national  states,  nearly  equal  in  power, 
and  jealous  of  one  another,  struck  a  final  blow  at  the  idea  of  a 
single  European  head. 

While  international  law  did  not  really  exist  during  this  period, 
since  the  power  that  claimed  supremacy  was  seldom  able  to  enforce 
its  commands,  a  number  of  secondary  influences  were  preparing 
the  way  for  it : 

(a)  The  revival  of  commerce  and  the  growth  of  practically  in- 
dependent cities  led  to  maritime  codes  regulating  their  dealings. 
The  most  important  was  the  Consolato  del  Mare,  drawn  up  prob- 
ably in  the  twelfth  century  and  observed  by  all  the  Mediterranean 
powers.    It  contained  rules  concerning  peace  and  war,  rights  of 
neutrals,  prize  law,  and  navigation.    Other  codes,  such  as  the  cus- 
toms of  Amsterdam,  the  constitutions  of  the  Hanseatic  League, 
etc.,  were  recognized  by  cities  in  northwest  Europe. 

(b)  The  feudal  system,  while  based  on  the  idea  of  a  common 
superior,  brought  in  the  concept  of  territorial  sovereignty.    The 
former  ruler  was  lord  of  his  people ;  now  the  ruler  became  lord 
of  his  land,  and  this  limited  his  power  to  his  own  territory  and 
laid  the  foundation  for  the  modern  theory  of  sovereignty. 

(c)  Christianity  and  chivalry  taught  more  humane  methods  of 
warfare  and  emphasized  the  brotherhood  of  nations. 

(d)  The  revived  study  of  Roman  law  laid  the  basis  for  new 
ideas  as  to  the  relations  of  state  to  state : 


136          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

(1)  In  \ht  jus  gentium  of  the  Romans  men  thought  they  had 
found  a  "law  of  nature," — fundamental  principles  to  which  the 
laws  of  all  sovereigns  should  conform. 

(2)  Since  national  states  arose  as  absolute  paofiarchies,  they 
were  considered  the  property  of  their  kings.    Relations  between 
states  were  regarded  as  dealings  between  individuals,  and  to  these 
the  Roman  laws  of  property  and  contracts  were  applied. 

3.  Third  period.  With  the  way  cleared  by  the  destruction  of 
the  feudal  system  and  the  old  idea  of  a  common  superior ;  with 
the  rise  of  national  states  comparatively  equal  and  organized  on  a 
territorial  basis,  and  with  relations  in  peace  and  war  demanding 
new  rules ;  with  the  revived  study  of  Roman  law  furnishing  the 
legal  ideas  which  could  be  applied  to  these  conditions,  modern 
international  principles  were  the  inevitable  outcome.  These  re- 
ceived their  first  definite  formulation  in  the  "  De  Jure  Belli  ac  Pacis  " 
of  Hugo  Grotius,  a  Hollander  (1625).  The  enormous  influence 
of  this  work  was  due  partly  to  the  wide  knowledge  and  logical  sys- 
tem of  Grotius,  based  on  the  universally  recognized  theory  of  the 
law  of  nature,  and  partly  to  the  horrors  of  the  religious  wars  and 
to  general  desire  for  principles  of  international  dealings.  These 
religious  wars  had  developed  into  great  political  contests,  and  the 
final  supremacy  of  France  over  Austria,  the  remnant  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire,  destroyed  the  last  trace  of  the  "  common-supe- 
rior "  idea  and  made  necessary  a  new  theory.  In  the  Peace  of 
Westphalia  (1648),  which  practically  created  modern  Europe,  the 
leading  principles  of  .GlQtius  were  recognized,  and  his  work  was 
soon  studied  in  the  universities.  His  fundamental  doctrines  were  : 

(a)  All  states  are  equally  sovereign  and  independent. 

(b)  The  jurisdiction  of  the  state  is  absolute  over  its  entire  area. 
Here  we  have  the  modern  idea  of  the  state,  with  sovereignty 

viewed  in  both  its  external  and  internal  aspects ;  and  on  this  basis 
modern  international  law  has  developed.  While  the  theory  of  a 
law  of  nature,  upon  which  earlier  writers  based  their  ideas,  has 
been  discredited,  the  fundamental  principles  rest  secure  on  the 
basis  of  common  consent ;  and  the  history  of  international  law  since 
1648  has  been  that  of  extension  and  increasing  defmiteness  rather 
than  of  change  in  point  of  view. 


RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  STATE 


137 


66.  Sources  of  international  law.    If  we  analyze  the  existing 
rules  of  international  relations,  their  main  sources  will  be  found  in  : 

1 .  Roman  law.    This  formed  a  complete  and  general  code  from 
which  most  continental  states  derived  their  legal  principles,  and 
its  authority  was  frequently  invoked  to  cover  the  early  relations  of 
state  to  state.    Besides,  the  Roman  idea  of  a  jus  gentium,  or  sys- 
tem of  law  common  to  all  nations,  led  to  the  idea  that  back  of  all 
laws  made  by  states  existed  a  code  of  moral  obligations,  or  natural 
law,  and  that  this  should  be  binding  on  all  states.    Finally,  the 
principle  of  Roman  law  that  taught  the  equality  of  all  citizens  be- 
fore the  law  led  naturally  to  the  new  idea  of  states  as  equal  and 

independent. 

2.  The  works  of  great  ivriters.    From  histories  and  biographies 
may  be  obtained  much  information  regarding  wars,  diplomacy,  and 
treaties,  which  have  influenced  the  relations  of  states  and  the 
growth  of  international  law.    Even  more  important  are  the  writ- 
ings of  great  jurists.    From  the  time  of  Grotius  a  long  list  of  able 
writers  has  been  formulating  rules,  which  states  have  adopted  in 
their  external  dealings,  or  has  been  reducing  to  a  logical  system 
the  principles  gradually  worked  out  as  the  result  of  numerous  con- 
crete instances.    The  work  of  Grotius,  Bynkershoek,  and  Vattel 
belongs  mainly  to  the  earlier  formative  period  ;  while  that  of  Kent, 
Wheaton,  Manning,  and,  in  more  recent  times,  Woolsey,  Lawrence, 
and  Hall,  has  been  chiefly  to  arrange  and  classify,  and  to  raise 
international  law  from  chaos  into  a  science. 

3.  Treaties  and  conventions.    Since  international  law  derives 
its  binding  force  from  the  consent  of  states,  and  since  treaties  are 
compacts  entered  into  by  states,  describing  conditions  which  they 
promise  to  observe,  such  agreements  form  an  important  source  of 
international  law.    Some,  which  are  signed  by  a  large  number  of 
states   in  practical  agreement,   create   international  law ;   others, 
which  are  special  arrangements  among  a  few  states,  show  what 
international  law  is,  by  specially  providing  for  its  exceptions.    The 
most  important  treaties  that  form  sources  of  international  law  deal 
with  questions  of : 

(a)  Territory.    Examples  are  the  treaties  of  Westphalia  (1648), 
Utrecht  (1713),  Paris  (1763). 


138         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

(b)  Sovereignty.    Examples  are  the  treaties  of  Versailles  (1783), 
Paris  (1856).  7 

(c)  Conduct.    Examples  are  the  Geneva  Convention  (a  864)  and 
the  Brussels  Conference  (1890). 

4.  International  conferences  and  arbitration  tribunals.    These 
are  expected  to  administer  existing  international  law  or  to  decide 
questions  involving  international  relations,  and  many  principles 
which  have  been  thus  laid  down  are  now  an  accepted  part  of  inter- 
national law.    In  general,  while  English  and  American  jurists  place 
emphasis  on  cases  and  precedents,  German  and  French  jurists 
follow  codes  ;  and  in  the  majority  of  cases  no  new  legal  principles 
are  created. 

5 .  The  municipal  law  of  states.    Many  of  the  ordinary  statutes 
of  all  states  deal  with  international  questions ;  and  the  attitude 
which  these  laws  take  indicates,  and  to  a  certain  degree  creates, 
international  usage.    Questions  of  citizenship  and  naturalization, 
neutrality,  tariff,  extradition,  army  and  navy  regulations,  diplomatic 
and  consular  service,  etc.,  are  a  few  of  the  subjects  that  must  be 
dealt  with  by  the  laws  of  each  state,  although  the  interests  of  other 
states  are  concerned.     In  addition,  the  decisions  of  the  courts  in 
dealing  with  such  questions  are  often  quoted  as  precedents  in  inter- 
national negotiation.    The  decisions  of  admiralty  courts  in  prize 
cases  are  based  almost  entirely  on  international  law ;  and  some  of 
the  most  important  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  have  dealt  with  questions  fundamentally  international. 

6.  Diplomatic  correspondence;  state  papers.    The  correspond- 
ence between  diplomats  of  various  states  or  between  the  home 
government  and  its  diplomatic  agents  often  forms  sources  of  in- 
formation as  to  usage,  and  becomes  precedent.    Many  states  still 
regard  such  information  as  confidential,  but  the  United  States  and 
England  publish  the  greater  part  of  their  foreign  correspondence. 
Instructions  issued  by  states  for  the  guidance  of  their  officers  or 
tribunals  are  also  important.    Thus  the  "  French   Marine  Ordi- 
nance "  of  1 86 1  formed  the  basis  for  international  prize  law ;  and 
the  "  Instructions  for  the  Guidance  of  the  Armies  of  the  United 
States  in  the  Field"  (1863)  exerted  considerable  influence  on  the 
general  adoption  of  more  humane  methods  of  warfare. 


RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  STATE 


139 


These  sources,  however,  do  not  create  international  law  until 
their  provisions  have  become  a  part  of  the  custom  and  usage  of 
states,  and  are  supported  by  international  public  opinion.  Besides, 
as  conditions  and  public  opinion  change,  customs  and  usages  for- 
merly sanctioned  are  gradually  replaced  by  newer  usages,  which 
then  become  a  part  of  international  law. 

67.  Parties  to  international  law.  Primarily  international  law 
governs  the  relations  of  states,  that  is,  of  sovereign  political  com- 
munities considered  as  equal  in  rights  and  obligations.  To  a  lim- 
ited extent,  however,  it  also  deals  with  nonsovereign  organizations, 
and  even  with  individuals.1  Such  bodies,  which  under  certain  con- 
ditions and  to  a  partial  extent  come  under  the  jurisdiction  of  inter- 
national law,  include : 

1.  Nonsovereign  political    organisations.     A    confederation, 
although  composed  of  a  number  of  sovereign  states,  may  act  as 
a  unit  in  external  affairs  and  thus  become  a  party  10  international 
law  as  long  as  the  confederation  is  maintained.    The  German  and 
Swiss  confederations  which  preceded  present  Germany  and  Swit- 
zerland occupied  such  a  position.    A  protectorate,  or  political  com- 
munity which  is  under  the  suzerainty  of  some  state,  may  have 
international  dealings  on  all  questions  not  forbidden  by  the  suze- 
rain.   Egypt  as  a  protectorate  of  England,  and  Cuba  of  the  United 
States,  are  examples.    A  state  neutralized  by  a  great  international 
treaty  occupies  a  peculiar  position.    By  agreement  among  the  lead- 
ing states  of   Europe,  Belgium^and  Switzerland  may  not  wage 
offensive  war.    To  what  extent  that  tends  to  destroy  the  sover- 
eignty, and  therefore  the  statehood,  of  Belgium  and  Switzerland 
is  a  difficult  question  in  political  science.    Part  of  a  state  waging 
civil  war  against  the  remainder  may  also  become  temporarily  a 
subject  of  international  law. 

2.  Corporations.  vAs  owners  of  property,  especially  when,  with 
property  rights,  are  given  governing  powers,  as  was  the  case  with 
England's   famous    East    India    Company,   and,    more    recently, 
with  the  German  East  Africa  Company  and  the  British  South 
Africa  Company,  —  such  organizations,  though  receiving  all  their 

1  Hall,  International  Law,  Part  I,  chap.  i. 
Lawrence,  The  Principles  of  International  Law,  Part  I,  chap.  iv. 


140         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

powers  from  some  sovereign  state,  may  have  dealings  that  bring 
them  within  the  scope  of  international  law. 

3.  Individuals.  Although  international  law  usually  deals  with 
individuals  only  through  the  states  to  which  they  belong,  in  certain 
cases,  for  example,  as  owners  of  property,  as  pirates  or  blockade 
runners,  or  as  unauthorized  combatants,  individuals  may  come  into 
direct  relations  with  states  other  than  their  own,  and  in  such  cases 
they  are  properly  included  as  subjects  of  international  law. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  all  of  the  above  cases  are  exceptional  or 
temporary.  International  law  includes  them  only  under  peculiar 
circumstances,  or  covers  only  a  small  part  of  their  external  rela- 
tions. Even  when  considering  international  law  as  dealing  funda- 
mentally with  sovereign  ^states,  a  further  distinction  must  be  made. 
It  includes  only  those  states  that  are  commonly  recognized  by  one 
another,  —  what  is -usually  called  the  "family  of  nations."  This 
excludes  savage  or  barbarous  communities,  even  though  they  be 
politically  independent,  and  includes  : 

1.  Those  states  that  existed  before  international  law  was  devel- 
oped ;  such  as  France,  Spain,  England,  and  others. 

2.  New  states  admitted  to  the  family  of  nations  under  the  fol- 
lowing conditions  : 

(a)  States  formerly  considered  uncivilized,  admitted  by  common 
consent  or  treaty,  as  has  been  the  case  with  Turkey,  Persia,  Japan, 
and  others. 

(b)  States  formed  by  civilized  men  in  formerly  uninhabited  or 
uncivilized  regions,  as  in  the  case  of  Liberia  and  of  the  South 
African  Republic  before  it  became  a  part  of  the  British  Empire. 

(c)  States  whose  independence  was  recognized  after  a  success- 
ful revolt,  as  in  the  case  of  the  United  States  and  the  various  South 
American  republics. 

(d)  States  formed  by  a  union  of  former  sovereignties,  as  in  the 
case  of  Germany  and  Italy. 

With  the  above  modifications,  including  certain  nonsovereign 
bodies  and  excluding  uncivilized  sovereign  bodies,  international 
law  may  be  said  to  deal  with  a  number  of  states  which  recognize 
common  rules,  and  which  have  equal  standing  before  those  rules. 
It  must  still  be  remembered  that  in  actual  practice  the  states  that 


RELATION  OF  STATE  TO  STATE 


141 


possess  powerful  armies  and  navies,  especially  the  British  Empire 
and  France,  exercise  a  preponderant  influence  in  European  affairs ; 
and  that  the  United  States,  by  means  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine, 
occupies  a  similar  position  in  America. 

68.  Nature  of  international  law.  The  foregoing  discussion  of 
interstate  relations  paves  the  way  for  a  consideration  of  the  real 
nature  of  international  law.  If  the  fundamental  distinction  that 
separates  legal  from  moral  rules  be  that  the  former  are,  and  the 
latter  are  not,  commands  given  and  enforced  by  a  determinate 
authority,  then  international,  law  is  not  properly  law.  No_  power 
of  enforcement  exists,  since  it  is  created  among  sovereignties ;  no 
impartial  authority  exists  to  interpret  its  principles  or  to  apply 
"them  in  specific  cases.  Just  as  custom  is  a  sort  of  imperfect  law, 
irf  a  primitive  and  imperfectly  organized  state,  so  international  law 
is  a  sort  of  international  public  opinion  or  customary  observance. 
imperfectly  enforced  in  an  imperfectly  organized  world  state.  From 
this  standpoint,  tolnake  it  ^ffective7~there  should"  5e__a_definite, 
rqcjagmzed  code  of  international  law,  with  international  courts  to 
interpret  and  apply  it.  To  make  it  properly  law,  there  should  then 
be  compulsory  obedience  to  that  authority ;  but  that  would  destroy 
the  sovereignty  of  the  state,  and  such  law  would  be  the  municipal 
law  of  a  world  state.  f 

On  the  other  hand,  international  law  is  considerably  more  than 
a  collection  of  moral  rules.  Its  "  doctrines  have  been  elaborated 
by  a  course  of  legal  reasoning  ;  in  international  controversies  prece- 
dents are  used  in  a  strictly  legal  manner ;  the  opinions  of  writers 
are  quoted  and  relied  upon  for  the  same  purposes  as  those  for 
which  the  opinions  of  writers  are  invoked  under  a  system  of 
municipal  law  ;  the  conduct  of  states  is  attacked,  defended,  and 
judged  within  the  range  of  international  law  by  reference  to  legal 
considerations  alone ;  and  finally  it  is  recognized  that  there  is  an 
international  morality  distinct  from  law,  violation  of  which  gives 
no  formal  ground  of  complaint,  however  odious  the  action  of  the 
ill  doer  may  be."  1  Besides,  serious  objections  have  been  raised  to 
the  statement  that  municipal  law  is  always  created  and  enforced 
by  determinate  authority.  The  legal  fiction  by  which  custom  is 

1  Hall,  International  Law,  p.  14. 


142          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

transformed  retrospectively  into  law  when  enforced  by  the  courts 
sufficiently  shows  the  rather  indefinite  boundary  between  law  and 
custom. 

If,  then,  examples  of  what  are  considered  by  all  as  law  are  simi- 
lar in  sanction  to  international  rules,  and  if  these  rules  are  formed 
by  legal  methods  and  treated  as  legal  in  character,  it  must  at  least 
be  admitted  that,  while  they  lie  on  the  extreme  frontier  of  law,  it 
is  more  correct  and  more  convenient  to  deal  with  them  as  a  branch 
of  law  than  as  a  branch  of  morals.  For  this  reason  they  are  prop- 
erly included  in  a  treatise- on  political  science.  They  are  sanctioned 
by  laws  passed  by  separate  states,  which  incorporate  the  principles 
of  international  law  into  their  municipal  law  and  enforce  them  on 
their  citizens ;  by  the  moral  sentiment  that  exists  among  nations, 
and  that  causes  loss  of  prestige  to  states  violating  it ;  and,  in  last 
resort,  by  war,  in  case  international  differences  cannot  be  other- 
wise adjusted.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
subjects  of  international  law  are  sovereign  states,  that  the  binding 
force  of  all  international  agreements  rests  upon  continued  consent 
and  voluntary  acceptance  on  the  part  of  sovereign  states,  and  that 
this  sanction,  though  often  strong  and  effective,  is  not  strictly  a 
legal  sanction. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XII 

REFERENCES 

DIVISIONS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 

1.  LAW  OF  PEACE 

a.  Independence 

b.  Equality 

c.  Property 

d.  Jurisdiction 

e.  Diplomacy 

2.  LAW  OF  WAR 

3.  LAW  OF  NEUTRALITY 

INDEPENDENCE  AND  EQUALITY 
PROPERTY 

1.  EXTENT  OF  A  STATE'S  TERRITORY 

2.  METHODS  OF  ACQUIRING  TERRITORY 

3.  METHODS  OF  EXERCISING  JURISDICTION  OVER  TERRITORY 

JURISDICTION 

1.  OVER  PERSONS 

2.  OVER  PROPERTY 

DIPLOMACY 

1.  DIPLOMATIC  REPRESENTATIVES 

2.  TREATIES 

3.  ARBITRATION 

WAR 

1.  USE  OF  FORCE  WITHOUT  WAR 

a.  Retorsion 

b.  Reprisal 

2.  CLASSIFICATION  OF  WARS 

a.  External 

b.  Internal 

3.  DECLARATION  OF  WAR 

4.  EFFECTS"  OF  WAR 

143 


144          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAJ/  SCIENCE 

5.  AGENTS,  INSTRUMENTS,  AND  METHODS  OF  WARFARE 

6.  TREATMENT  OF  PROPERTY  IN  WAR 

a.  On  land 

(1)  Public 

(2)  Private 

b.  At  sea 

NEUTRALITY 

1 .  DUTIES  OF  BELLIGERENT  STATES  TO  NEUTRAL  STATES 

2.  DUTIES  OF  NEUTRAL  STATES  TO  BELLIGERENT  STATES 
NEUTRAL  COMMERCE 

1.  CONTRABAND 

2.  BLOCKADE 


CHAPTER  XII 
CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 

REFERENCES 

DAVIS,  G.  B.  Elements  of  International  Law,  chaps,  ii-xv 

FOSTER,  J.  W.  The  Practice  of  Diplomacy 

FOSTER,  J.  W.  Arbitration  and  the  Hague  Court 

FOSTER,  J.  W.  A  Century  of  American  Diplomacy 

HALL,  W.  E.  International  Law,  Parts  II-IV 

HART,  A.  B.  Foundations  of  American  Foreign  Policy 

HENDERSON,  J.  B.  American  Diplomatic  Questions 

HILL,  D.  J.  History  of  European  Diplomacy 

LAWRENCE,  T.  J.  The  Principles  of  International  Law,  pp.  55-633 

MAHAN,  A.  T.  Sea  Power  and  its  Relation  to  the  War  of  1812 

MOORE,  J.  B.  International  Arbitrations 

MOORE,  J.  B.  International  Law  Digest 

SCOTT,  J.  B.  Cases  on  International  Law  f 

SMITH,  F.  E.  International  Law 

SNOW,  F.  Cases  in  International  Law 

Treaties  and  Conventions  of  the  United  States 

TUCKER,  G.  F.  The  Monroe  Doctrine 

WALPOLE,  S.  Foreign  Relations 

NOTE.  Since  this  chapter  aims  to  give  only  a  brief  outline  of  the  essential 
topics  with  which  international  law  deals,  no  detailed  references  to  authorities 
are  given.  The  arrangement  follows,  in  general,  that  of  Lawrence  in  his  "  Prin- 
ciples of  International  Law,"  but  the  statements  are,  in  the  main,  limited  to  those 
concerning  which  all  leading  authorities  agree. 

69.  Divisions  of  international  law.  In  outlining  the  scope  and 
divisions  of  the  relations  among  states,  a  fundamental  distinction 
is  that  between  the  normal  rights  and  obligations  that  exist  in  time 
of  peace  and  the  exceptional  rights  and  obligations  that  exist  in 
time  of  war.  A  further  subdivision  of  the  latter  gives  the  relation 
between  the  actual  belligerents,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  relation 
between  nonbelligerents  and  belligerents,  on  the  other.  The  three- 
fold division  of  international  law  thus  becomes  : 

1 .  The  law  governing  states  in  their  normal  peaceful  relations 

2.  The  law  governing  states  in  the  relation  of  war 

3.  The  law  governing  states  in  the  relation  of  neutrality 


146          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  normal  rights  and  obligations  of  states  may  be  further 
subdivided  in  so  far  as  they  are  concerned  with  independence, 
equality,  property,  jurisdiction,  and  diplomacy,  giving  as  a  general 
outline  for  the  contents  of  international  law  : l 

1 .  Normal  rights  and  obligations  of  states 

(a)  Rights  and  obligations  concerning  independence  ^ 

(b)  Rights  and  obligations  concerning  equality  |    The  law 

(c)  Rights  and  obligations  concerning  property  of 

(d)  Rights  and  obligations  concerning  jurisdiction  peace 

(e)  Rights  and  obligations  concerning  diplomacy      ) 

2.  Abnormal  rights  and  obligations  of  states 

(a)  Rights  and  obligations  concerning   ^ 

war  /  The  law  of  war 

(b)  Rights  and  obligations  concerning   ^ 

neutrality  /  The  law  of  neutrality 

70.  Independence  and  equality.  The  right  of  a  state  to  inde- 
pendence is  the  logical  outcome  of  its  sovereignty,  of  which,  in 
fact,  independence  is  the  external  aspect.  Accordingly  each  state 
has  a  right  to  manage  its  affairs  without  interference  from  other 
states,  and  is  under  corresponding  obligations  of  noninterference 
in  their  affairs.  Evidently  perfect  independence  among  states  is 
as  impossible  as  perfect  liberty  among  individuals.  Mutual  rela- 
tions demand  mutual  concessions,  and  treaty  stipulations  frequently 
put  voluntary  limits  to  state  action.  In  fact,  after  unsuccessful  war 
or  because  of  unequal  strength,  even  involuntary  restrictions  are 
sometimes  enforced.  An  exact  line  between  sovereign  independ- 
ence and  various  degrees  of  protection,  restriction,  and  dependence 
is,  in  practice,  difficult  to  draw.  In  general,  however,  states  are 
considered  independent,  and  interference  of  any  kind  is  excep- 
tional, and  justifiable  only  under  certain  conditions.  Any  interfer- 
ence violating  independence  is  called  intervention.  It  involves 
force  or  the  threat  of  force,  and  presupposes  lack  of  consent  of  at 
least  one  party  to  the  interference.  In  these  respects  it  differs 
from  advice,  mediation,  and  arbitration,  in  each  of  which  the  idea 

1  Lawrence,  The  Principles  of  International  Law,  p.  no. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW      147 

of  coercion  is  absent.    International  law  recognizes  the  following 
as  legal  rights  of  intervention  : 

1.  Necessity  of  self-preservation.    For  states,  as  for  persons, 
this  right  overrides  ordinary  laws.    The  danger  must,  however,  be 
direct,  immediate,  and  sufficiently  important  to  justify  force. 

2.  Enforcement  of  treaty  rights.    When  the  state  of  things 
guaranteed  in  a  treaty  is  threatened,  intervention,  if  provided  for 
in  the  treaty,  is  just  and  legal  when  carried  out  to  the  extent  and 
in  the  manner  prescribed. 

3.  Prevent  or  terminate  illegal  intervention  of  another  state. 
A  state  may  interfere  to  save  a  friend  on  the  same  grounds  as  those 
on  which  it  maintains  its  own  existence.  This  right  is  liable  to  abuse 
and  easily  shades  off  into  actions  hard  to  justify.    An  intervening 
state  should  be  sure  that  sufficient  cause  exists,  and  that  its  motives 
are  unselfish.  The  maintenance  of  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe 
and  intervention  in  internal  wars  on  the  grounds  of  humanity  are 
often  excuses  put  forth  to  uphold  interference,  and  history  is  full  of 
unjustifiable  acts  committed  in  their  name.    In  such  cases  interven- 
tion is  a  matter  of  policy  rather  than  of  right.    Each  case  must  be 
judged  on  its  merits  and  be  decided  by  international  public  opinion. 

A  peculiar  kind  of  intervention  recently  became  prominent  when 
European  states  compelled  South  American  states  to  pay  debts 
owed  to  citizens  of  the  European  states.  The  Drago  Doctrine, 
so  called  from  the  Argentine  statesman  who  urged  it,  properly 
declared  that,  since  states  are  sovereign,  such  intervention  was 
illegal.  Still  justice  demanded  some  action  when  a  government 
refused  to  pay  its  debts.  In  the  second  Hague  conference  (1907) 
it  was  agreed  that  such  disputes  should  be  submitted  to  the  Hague 
Tribunal,  but  that  if  the  debtor  country  refuses  to  arbitrate  or 
refuses  to  abide  by  the  award,  intervention  is  justifiable. 

In  modern  political  theory  all  sovereign  states  are  considered  as 
having  an  equal  status  before  international  law.  While,  for  pur- 
poses of  ceremonial  and  etiquette,  certain  distinctions  remain, 
squabbles  over  precedence,  formerly  common,  are  now  rare ;  and 
in  such  devices  as  alphabetical  order  in  international  conferences, 
and  the  alternat  in  treaties,1  even  the  semblance  of  inequality 

1  See  section  73. 


148          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

is  avoided.  In  actual  practice,  however,  the  doctrine  of  equality 
seems  to  be  breaking  down.  In  Europe  the  British  Empire, 
France,  and  Italy,  left  in  a  dominant  position  by  the  recent  war, 
practically  control  the  affairs  of  the  Old  World,  their  actions 
being  considered  binding  on  the  other  states  regardless  of  objec- 
tions. States  have  been  created,  dismembered,  and  coerced ;  con- 
ditions of  peace  dictated  ;  and,  in  general,  a  sort  of  political 
supervision  established.  In  America  the  United  States  holds  un- 
questioned primacy,  and,  by  means  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  exer- 
cises an  increasing  influence  in  the  affairs  of  this  continent  that 
is  scarcely  consistent  with  the  theory  of  state  equality.  Neither 
the  concert  of  powers  nor  the  Monroe  Doctrine  rests  on  definite 
principles  of  international  law,  but  as  important  features  of  modern 
international  politics  they  demand  consideration. 

71.  Property.  All  modern  states  are  large  property  owners. 
Public  buildings,  munitions  of  war,  ships,  and  similar  possessions 
are  ordinarily  dealt  with  by  municipal  law ;  and  only  in  case  of 
war,  when  they  become  liable  to  capture,  are  they  subject  to  inter- 
national regulation.  The  property  with  which  international  law 
usually  deals  is  territory  ;  that  is,  the  land  and  water  areas  over 
which  each  state  exercises  jurisdiction.  At  present  territory  is 
essential  to  state  existence,  law  has  a  territorial  basis,  and  sover- 
eignty and  territory  are  conterminous.  Accordingly  several  ques- 
tions become  important.  What  constitutes  the  territory  of  a  state  ? 
How  may  territory  be  acquired  ?  In  what  ways  may  a  state 
exercise  control  over  territory  ? 

I .  The  territory  of  a  state  includes  : 

(a)  All  land  and  water  within  its  external  boundaries.   When 
rivers  or  lakes  separate  states,  the  boundary  line,  unless  otherwise 
fixed  by  treaty,  follows  mid-channel. 

(b)  The  sea  within  a  three-mile  limit  from  its  coasts  at  low  tide. 
"  This  peculiar  jurisdiction  is  acknowledged  to  guarantee  immunity 
from  acts  of  belligerency  between  ships  of  nations  other  than  that 
to  which  the  coast  sea  belongs ;  to  enable  a  state  to  carry  into 
effect  its  maritime  laws  and  customs  regulations ;  to  secure  pro- 
tection to  the  inhabitants  of  the  coast,  especially  to  those  engaged 
in  coast  fisheries ;  and  to  provide  for  an  adequate  system  of  coast 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW      149 

•  defense."  l  This  limit,  based  on  the  range  of  artillery  fire,  was 
fixed  about  a  century  ago.  While  it  seems  proper  that  its  width 
should  increase  with  the  greater  range  of  modern  artillery,  and 
efforts  along  this  line  have  been  made,  no  international  agreement 
for  a  wider  zone  has  been  reached. 

(c)  Bays  and  estuaries  that  indent  its  coast.    No  exact  limit  has 
been  placed  on  the  width  of  opening  between  headlands  over 
which  a  state  may  claim  jurisdiction.    Considerable  authority  exists 
for  a  ten-mile  limit,  but  in  some  cases,  as  in  the  Dutch  control 
over  the  Zuyder    Zee,  or  that  of  the  United    States  over  the 
Chesapeake,  even  wider  waters  are  included. 

(d)  Islands  fringing  its  coast.    While  it  is  sometimes  difficult  to 
draw  a  definite  line  as  to  where  littoral  islands  end,  the  general 
rule  is  that  such  islands  are  essential  to  the  defense  of  a  state  and 
form  part  of  its  territory. 

2.  The  principal  methods  of  acquiring  territory  are  as  follows  : 

(a)  Occupation.    Land  previously  unoccupied  or  held  by  un- 
civilized peoples,  not  recognized  as  belonging  to  the  family  of 
nations,  may  be  thus  acquired.    Such  action  should  include  a  dec- 
laration of  intention  to  occupy  the  territory,  and  actual  settlement. 

(b)  Cession.    Territory  may  be  formally  transferred,  usually  by 
treaty,  from  one  state  to  another.    Such  transfer  may  take  the 
form  of  sale,  gift,  or  exchange. 

(c)  Conquest.  Such  acquisition,  resulting  from  force,  differs  from 
cession  in  that  the  consent  of  the  former  owner  is  unwillingly  given. 
Title  based  on  conquest  is  nevertheless  valid  in  international  law. 

(d)  Accretion.    By  the  action  of  water  alluvial  islands  may  be 
formed  or  water  boundaries  changed. 

3.  A  state  may  exercise  authority  over  territory  in  several  ways  : 

(a)  As  a  part  of  its  dominions.    Over  such  territory  a  state  has 
absolute  power  in  external  and  internal  affairs,  although  it  may 
delegate  to  subordinate  organs  large  functions  of  local  or  colonial 
self-government. 

(b)  As  a  protectorate.    The  exact  status  of  a  protectorate  is  not 
yet  uniform  or  clearly  defined.    In  general  the  relation  is  estab- 
lished by  treaty  between  a  stronger  and  a  weaker  state ;  and  in 

1  Davis,  Elements  of  International  Law,  p.  55. 


150         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

most  protectorates  foreign  relations  are  controlled  by  the  protecting 
state,  but  internal  affairs  ordinarily  are  not  interfered  with.  In 
their  relations  to  other  states  both  constitute  a  single  system,  the 
protecting  state  defending  the  protectorate  against  interference, 
and,  in  turn,  being  responsible  for  its  actions.  The  relations  ex- 
isting between  France  and  Tunis  and  between  the  United  States 
and  Cuba  are  examples. 

(c)  As  a  sphere  of  influence.  This  is  an  even  more  recent  and 
indefinite  method  of  exercising  authority.  It  is  applied  to  territory 
occupied  by  uncivilized  peoples,  and  rests  upon  treaties  drawn  up 
among  the  great  powers,  —  the  people  occupying  the  territory  con- 
cerned not  being  party  to  these  agreements.  Over  a  sphere  of 
influence  a  state  does  not  necessarily  exercise  any  direct  control, 
either  internal  or  external,  but  it  claims  that  other  states  shall  not 
establish  protectorates  or  acquire  dominion  there,  while  it  is  free  to 
do  so  if  it  chooses.1  The  first  steps  in  acquiring  spheres  of  in- 
fluence are  often  taken  by  private  incorporated  companies  to  whom 
governing  authority  as  well  as  trading  rights  are  granted.  As  a 
result  responsibilities  are  soon  thrown  on  the  governments  charter- 
ing such  companies,  and  spheres  of  influence  tend  to  become 
protectorates  or  colonies.  The  partition  of  Africa  has  proceeded 
largely  by  this  method. 

Special  rights  over  waters  may  be  mentioned.  Formerly  certain 
states  claimed  jurisdiction  over  parts  of  the  high  seas.  These  claims 
are  now  abandoned,  the  last  attempt  to  enforce  such  right,  that  of 
the  United  States  in  the  Bering  Sea  controversy,  being  unsuccessful. 
Similarly,  states  formerly  controlled  narrow  passages  lying  within 
their  territory,  even  when  joining  portions  of  the  high  seas.  Until 
1857  Denmark  levied  sound  dues  on  ships  passing  between  the 
North  Sea  and  the  Baltic.  At  present,  except  for  the  Bosporus  and 
Dardanelles,  where  special  treaties  exclude  warships,  all  such  waters 
are  open  to  all  ships  for  "  innocent  passage."  The  Suez  and  Panama 
canals,  neutralized  by  international  agreement,  are  likewise  open  to 
all  ships  in  war  and  in  peace,  hostile  acts  alone  being  forbidden. 
It  is  also  the  custom  to  permit  free  navigation  of  great  rivers,  even 
if  they  lie  partly  or  wholly  within  the  territory  of  a  state. 

1  Lawrence,  The  Principles  of  International  Law,  p.  164. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW  1 5 1 

72.  Jurisdiction.  Jurisdiction  is  the  right  to  make  and  enforce 
law.  In  general  it  rests  on  a  territorial  basis,  and,  with  certain 
exceptions,  noted  later,  a  state's  jurisdiction  extends  over  all  per- 
sons and  things  within  its  territory.  The  persons  over  whom  a 
state  exercises  jurisdiction  include  : 

1.  Natural-bprn  citizens.    Each  state  decides  for  itself  what 
circumstances  of  birth  give  citizenship,   whether  determined  by 
place  of  birth  or  nationality  of  parents.    Lack  of  uniformity  results 
frequently  in  conflicting  claims  as  to  citizenship. 

2.  Naturalized  subjects.    Each  state  also  fixes  the  terms  upon 
which  it  will  admit  aliens  to  citizenship.    Important  international 
questions  arise  when  a  naturalized  citizen  returns  to  his  original 
homeland,  diverse  opinions  still  existing,  although  recent  treaties 
have  removed  many  grounds  of  contention. 

3.  Resident  aliens  and  alien  travelers.    These  are  subject  to 
the  laws  of  the  land,   but  their  political  status   is   not  thereby 
affected.    Usually  resident  aliens  are  exempt  from  military  service. 

In  the  case  of  property,  jurisdiction  over  real  property  belongs 
to  the  state  in  which  it  is  located ;  jurisdiction  over  personal  prop- 
erty belongs,  in  general,  to  the  state  in  which  the  owner  has  his 
home.  An  important  exception  prevails  in  the  case  of  merchant 
vessels.  When  in  the  territorial  waters  of  a  state,  they  come  under 
its  jurisdiction,  although  states  frequently  refuse  to  exercise  this 
right  in  cases  of  purely  internal  concern  to  the  vessel.  Over  its 
own  vessels,  public  and  private,  a  state  has  jurisdiction  on  the  high 
seas.  Its  authority  also  extends  to  pirates  taken  by  its  vessels. 
The  essence  of  piracy  may  be  stated  as  an  act  of  violence  com- 
mitted outside  the  jurisdiction  of  any  state  and  unauthorized  by 
any  state.  Pirates  lose  the  right  of  protection  by  their  original 
states  and  become  international  outlaws. 

Limited  jurisdiction  is  possessed  by  a  state  over  its  subjects 
abroad.  This  is,  of  course,  a  mixture  of  personal  with  territorial 
jurisdiction.  Offenses  against  the  home  state,  or  sometimes  the 
graver  crimes,  if  not  punished  by  the  state  in  which  they  were 
committed,  are  punished  by  the  home  state  if  the  criminal  returns 
to  its  territory  and  thus  comes  under  its  jurisdiction.  lf  The  sur- 
render by  one  state  to  another  of  an  individual  who  is  found  within 


152          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  territory  of  the  former,  and  is  accused  of  committing  a  crime 
in  the  latter,"  1  is  called  extradition.  Most  states  have  drawn  up 
extradition  treaties  covering  the  majority  of  cases,  offenses  "  of  a 
political  nature"  usually  being  excluded.  If  the  case  is  not  covered 
by  treaty  agreement,  a  state  may  give  up  the  accused,  but  is  under 
no  obligation  to  do  so.  A  peculiar  case  arises  when  the  accused  is 
a  citizen  of  the  state  to  which  he  has  fled,  and  not  of  the  state  in 
which  the  offense  was  committed.  England  and  the  United  States 
often  give  up  their  own  subjects,  keeping  watch  on  the  justice  of 
the  trial ;  but  many  states  refuse,  either  themselves  punishing  their 
citizens  or  allowing  them  to  go  unpunished. 

Several  exceptions  to  the  general  rule  that  jurisdiction  coincides 
with  territory  should  be  noted  : 

1 .  Foreign  rulers  and  their  suites  when  traveling  in  other  states 
are  free  from  their  jurisdiction. 

2.  Public  armed  forces  of  states  are  exempt  from  foreign  juris- 
diction when  abroad.    Special  permission  is  usually  secured  to  pass 
troops  through  foreign  territory,  but  is  not  necessary  when  a  war- 
ship enters  a  foreign  harbor. 

3.  Diplomatic  agents  and  their  households  are  free  from  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  state  to  which  they  are  sent. 

4.  By  special  treaty  arrangements  citizens  of  western  states  resi- 
dent in  certain  Eastern  countries,  including  Turkey,  China,  Siam, 
and  others,  may  have  their  cases  tried  in  special  consular  courts 
that  apply  the  laws  of  their  home  state.    In  Egypt  international 
courts  have  worked  well. 

73.  Diplomacy.  In  foreign  intercourse  a  state  may  communicate 
through  its  ministry  of  foreign  affairs,  through  special  commission- 
ers appointed  for  the  purpose,  or  through  its  regular  diplomatic 
officials  resident  in  the  foreign  state.  The  practice  of  sending  and 
receiving  diplomatic  representatives  is  very  ancient,  dating  back 
at  least  to  the  Egyptians  and  Greeks.  Until  the  close  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  however,  ambassadors  were  sent  on  special  occasions 
only,  and  their  missions  were  temporary.  Increased  intercourse, 
due  to  commerce  and  wars,  led  to  the  establishment,  about  the  six- 
teenth century,  of  a  permanent  service ;  but  the  rights  and  duties 

1  Lawrence,  Principles  of  International  Law,  p.  233. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW  153 

of  diplomats  were  not  clearly  defined  until  the  assembling  of  great 
international  conferences  after  general  European  wars.  Two  cen- 
turies ago  Latin  was  the  language  used  in  diplomacy ;  later  it  was 
replaced  by  French ;  recently  the  leading  states  have  begun  to  use 
their  own  languages. 

The  rules  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  as  modified  by  the  Con- 
gress of  Aix-la-Chapelle  (1818),  divided  diplomatic  representatives 
into  four  classes.  In  the  first  are  ambassadors  and  papal  legates 
or  nuncios,  these  latter  being  sent  to  Catholic  states  only.  The 
second  class  includes  envoys  or  ministers  plenipotentiary ;  the  third, 
ministers  resident;  and  the  fourth,  charges  d'affaires.  Within 
each  class  seniority  of  residence  gives  precedence.  In  general, 
states  send  representatives  of  the  same  rank  as  they  receive.  A 
state  may  refuse  to  receive,  may  ask  the  recall  of,  or  may  dismiss 
a  particular  diplomat  who  is  persona  non  grata,  without  insult  to 
his  state,  but  the  complete  termination  of  diplomatic  relations 
almost  always  precedes  war.  The  duties  of  a  diplomatic  official 
include  keeping  his  home  government  informed  as  to  political 
events  and  public  opinion  in  the  state  to  which  he  is  sent,  con- 
ducting negotiations  and  treaties,  protecting  the  rights  of  fellow 
citizens  residing  or  traveling  abroad,  and  representing  his  state  in 
numerous  social  and  ceremonial  ways.  The  fiction  of  exterritori- 
ality, by  which  foreign  representatives  are  exempt  from  any  juris- 
diction except  that  of  their  own  state,  has  already  been  mentioned. 

Consuls  originated  after  the  crusades,  when  the  Italian  cities 
became  important  commercial  centers.  Established  by  these  cities 
in  the  Levant,  where  different  law  and  religion  prevailed,  their 
duties  were  at  first  chiefly  judicial.  As  commerce  developed  in 
western  Europe  the  reciprocal  exchange  of  consuls  was  begun, 
first  by  trading  companies,  later  by  governments.  Gradually  their 
judicial  powers  were  restricted  and  their  commercial  functions 
enlarged.  At  present  they  are  agents  sent  to  various  foreign 
places,  especially  seaports,  to  represent  the  trade  interests  of  their 
states.  Each  state  determines  the  rank,  tenure,  manner  of  appoint- 
ment, and  duties  of  its  own  consuls.  In  semicivilized  states'  they 
have  the  same  exemption  from  jurisdiction  as  diplomats.  Their 
duties  include  a  general  supervision  of  the  business  interests  of 


154 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


their  states,  certain  judicial  authority  over  maritime  disputes  and 
offenses  committed  on  shipboard,  and  various  legal  and  notarial 
functions  in  the  interests  of  their  fellow  citizens  abroad.  The 
special  consular  courts  established  in  certain  Eastern  states  have 
been  mentioned. 

Formal  agreements  entered  into  by  states  are  called  treaties. 
While  no  coercive  authority  enforces  their  provisions,  inviolability 
of  treaties  is  the  basis  of  international  dealings,  and  nonobservance 
is  sufficient  cause  for  war.  Each  state,  in  its  fundamental  law, 
determines  the  location  of  its  treaty-making  power.  Usually  some 
branch  of  the  executive  exercises  this  function,  although,  in  the 
United  States,  ratification  by  the  Senate  is  required.  Accordingly, 
for  validity  of  treaties  it  is  essential  that  the  contracting  parties 
possess  the  treaty-making  power,  that  the  legal  organ  of  govern- 
ment makes  the  treaty,  that  formal  consent  of  both  parties  is  given, 
and  that  the  treaty  is  possible  of  fulfillment. 

Treaties  may  be  divided  into  transitory  agreements  or  conven- 
tions, which  are  complete  when  some  stipulated  act  is  performed, 
such  as  a  boundary  settlement  or  a  cession  of  territory ;  and  per- 
manent treaties,  which  have  continuing  effect  and  regulate  future 
relations.  Terms  frequently  used  in  connection  with  treaty-making 
include : 

1 .  Protocol.    A  rough  draft  of  preliminary  decisions  to  serve  as 
a  basis  for  a  later  treaty. 

2.  Ultimatum.    A  final  decision  of  one  party,  which  must  be 
accepted  or  rejected  without  change. 

3.  Manifesto.    A  statement  issued  by  one  party  giving  reasons 
for  a  particular  policy. 

4.  "Most-favored-nation  "  clause.    An  agreement  to  extend  to 
each  other  privileges  which  either  party  may  later  grant  to  any 
other  state. 

Treaties  are  sometimes  negotiated  by  special  commissions  ap- 
pointed for  the  purpose,  usually  by  the  minister  of  foreign  affairs 
with  the  regular  diplomatic  agents.  It  is  customary  to  sign  treaties 
of  peace  on  neutral  ground,  and  ordinary  treaties  in  the  state  whose 
interests  are  chiefly  concerned.  To  maintain  the  principle  of  state 
equality  the  altemat  is  now  common ;  that  is,  as  many  copies  of 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW      155 

the  treaty  are  prepared  as  there  are  states  concerned,  but  the  name 
of  each  state  appears  first  and  is  signed  first  in  its  own  version. 
Former  customs  of  elaborate  lists  of  titles  and  honors,  appeals  to 
God,  and  accompanying  gifts,  pledges,  or  hostages  are  now  practi- 
cally abandoned ;  but  the  great  states  sometimes  guarantee  treaties 
made  by  weaker  states. 

When  an  international  dispute  arises  the  aggrieved  state  usually 
makes  known  its  cause  for  complaint  and  demands  redress  from 
the  offending  state.  If  the  disagreement  is  serious,  war  may  result. 
Lesser  disputes  may  be  satisfactorily  settled  by  an  exchange  of 
diplomatic  notes,  by  diplomatic  negotiations,  by  mediation  of  a 
third  power  either  at  the  request  of  the  disputing  states  or  at  its 
own  suggestion,  or  by  arbitration.  In  arbitration  the  dispute  is 
submitted  to  a  tribunal  whose  composition,  powers,  and  method  of 
procedure  are  made  the  subject  of  a  preliminary  treaty.  Its  decision 
is  considered  binding  unless  bad  faith  on  the  part  of  the  arbiters 
or  violation  of  some  part  of  the  preliminary  agreement  can  be 
shown.  Arbitration  is  particularly  valuable  in  cases  involving  legal 
questions  demanding  careful  investigation  and  consideration. 

Interest  in  arbitration  as  a  means  of  international  adjustment  has 
been  increased  by  the  recent  Hague  conferences.  In  1899,  on  the 
invitation  of  the  Russian  czar,  delegates  representing  twenty-six 
states  met  at  The  Hague  to  discuss  methods  of  maintaining  peace, 
diminishing  the  hardships  of  war  by  land  and  sea,  and  easing  the 
burden  of  military  and  naval  armaments.  Since  unanimous  consent 
was  necessary  for  final  decision,  agreement  was  difficult,  but  several 
important  "conventions,"  signed  by  all,  or  bya  majority  of  states,  were 
drawn  up.  Because  of  opposition,  led  by  Germany,  no  agreement 
was  reached  concerning  disarmament ;  but  a  convention  concern- 
ing arbitration  was  signed  by  sixteen  states  and  has  been  observed 
since  by  others.  This  convention  urged  mediation  and  arbitration, 
created  an  International  Commission  of  Inquiry,  and  established  a 
permanent  Court  of  Arbitration,  outlining  its  powers  and  procedure. 
Several  disputes,  formerly  sufficient  to  cause  war,  have  been  ad- 
justed by  its  action.  In  1907  representatives  of  forty-four  states 
met  in  a  second  Hague  conference.  Obligatory  arbitration  and 
immunity  of  private  property  at  sea  in  time  of  war  were  discussed  ; 


I 


156          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

and,  while  unanimous  agreement  was  not  reached,  a  majority 
voted  in  favor  of  both  proposals.  Certain  rules  for  the  amelioration 
of  war  were  laid  down,  the  question  of  contractual  debts  was  set- 
tled,1 and  an  International  Prize  Court  was  established.  Similar 
conferences  will  probably  be  held  in  the  future. 

74.  War.  Since  no  authority  enforces  international  relations, 
differences  that  cannot  be  otherwise  adjusted  must  be  settled  by 
force.  Methods  of  applying  force,  short  of  actual  war,  include  : 

1.  Retorsion.    This  is  practically  international  retaliation,  plac- 
ing restrictions  upon,  or  refusing  privileges  to,  a  state  in  return 
for  unfriendly  action  on  its  part. 

2.  Reprisal.    This  is  seizure  or  retention  of  property  belonging 
to  the  offending  state  or  its  citizens.    Special  forms  of  reprisal  are 
embargo,  in  which  vessels  of  all  states  or  of  certain  states  are 
detained  in  port ;  and  pacific  blockade,  in  which  commercial  inter- 
course with  a  state  is  interfered  with  to  secure  redress  for  interna- 
tional wrong.    This  is,  in  fact,  a  sort  of  international  police  duty, 
affecting  only  the  states  concerned,  between  whom  there  is  usually 
considerable  disparity  in  strength. 

If  all  other  means  fail,  the  final  resource  is  war,  which  may  be 
defined  as  a  contest  carried  on  by  public  force  between  states  or 
parts  of  states.  Wars  may  be  divided  into  external  wars  between 
sovereign  states  and  internal  civil  wars  or  insurrections.  In  inter- 
nal wars  the  laws  of  war  are  applied  to  the  revolting  portion  of  a 
state  as  soon  as  military  force  is  needed  to  quell  the  insurrection. 
If  recognizedas  a  " belligerent  "^by  other  states,  the  revolting  popu- 
lation is  put  on  an  international  footing.  Such  recognition  should 
be  given,  however,  only  when  the  disturbance  has  reached  the  pro- 
portions of  a  considerable  war,  and  when  the  interests  of  the  recog- 
nizing states  are  involved.  Previous  to  this,  recognition  would  be 
an  unfriendly  act.  When  a  new  state  is  formed  by  a  successful 
revolt,  recognition  of  its  independence  by  other  states  is  necessary 
for  its  admission  to  the  family  of  nations.  Such  action  should  not 
be  taken  before  peace  is  made. 

The  right  to  declare  war  or  to  begin  hostilities  is  determined  by 
the  constitution  of  each  state.  Usually  the  executive  is  given 

1  See  section  70. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW      157 

authority  to  wage  defensive  war,  but  the  consent  of  the  legislature 
is  needed  for  offensive  war.  Power  to  declare  war,  formerly  vested 
in  colonial  governments  and  commercial  companies,  is  no  longer 
granted.  If  war  is  waged  by  unauthorized  persons,  their  state  may 
take  responsibility,  in  which  case  war  began  with  the  first  hostile 
act ;  or  it  may  disavow  the  act,  punish  the  offenders,  and  make 
reparation.  The  custom  of  issuing  formal  declarations  of  war  is 
falling  into  disuse,  but  a  state  intending  to  wage  war  should  at 
least  notify  its  own  citizens  and  neutral  states. 

The  direct  effect  of  war  is  to  place  belligerent  states  and  their 
citizens  in  a  condition  of  nonintercourse  with  each  other,  and  to 
make  each  citizen  of  one  state  the  legal  enemy  of  every  citizen  of 
the  other.  Commercial  intercourse  ceases  ;  contracts  and  other 
legal  obligations  are  suspended.  The  effect  of  war  on  treaties 
depends  upon  the  nature  of  their  contents.  Great  international 
agreements  or  treaties  intended  to  be  permanent,  executed  with  full 
knowledge  that  war  may  occur,  are  not  affected.  Ordinary  treaties 
between  belligerents  are  suspended  during  hostilities.  Treaties 
made  in  anticipation  of  war  come  into  effect  when  war  begins. 

The  laws  of  war  are  constantly  modified  as  conditions  of  warfare 
change.  The  general  tendency  is  toward  greater  humanity  and 
liberality.  War  is  now  considered  an  exceptional  condition,  to  be 
terminated  as  soon  as  possible.  It  is  to  be  waged  only  by  legally 
authorized  persons,  not  by  private  individuals  or  against  passive 
inhabitants  of -the  enemy's  territory.  The  smallest  amount  of  dam- 
age consistent  with  the  necessities  of  war  is  to  be  inflicted.  In  the 
treatment  of  persons,  combatants  and  noncombatants,  great  im- 
provement has  been  made  ;  but  property,  though  somewhat  safe- 
guarded, is  still  under  burdensome  disabilities.  At  present  there 
is  a  growing  desire  for  peace,  arbitration,  and  disarmament ;  at  the 
same  time,  armies  and  navies  are  increasing  in  size  and  efficiency, 
and  implements  of  destruction  are  multiplied. 

Considerable  difference  of  opinion  exists  as  to  the  proper  agents, 
instruments,  and  methods  of  warfare.  In  addition  to  the  regular 
army  and  navy,  including  organized  militia  and  reserves,  the 
Brussels  Conference  (1874)  gave  rights  of  combatants  to  guerrilla 
troops,  if  they  are  organized  under  a  leader  responsible  for  his 


158          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

subordinates,  wear  a  distinctive  badge  or  uniform,  carry  arms  openly, 
and  conform  to  the  usages  of  war.  A  levy  en  masse,  or  uprising 
of  the  male  population,  is  legitimate  if  they  are  drafted  by  the  gov- 
ernment or  if  they  take  up  arms  in  an  organized  way  to  resist  inva- 
sion. States  maintaining  large  standing  armies  often  refuse  to 
accept  this  principle.  An  uprising  in  territory  held  by  the  enemy 
is,  however,  unauthorized.  International  law  recognizes  the  use  of 
uncivilized  troops  if  organized  and  disciplined,  but  does  not  sanc- 
tion the  employment  of  uncontrollable  bands  of  savages.  Spies 
may  be  used,  but,  if  captured,  they  are  liable  to  the  penalty  im- 
posed by  military  law.  Privateering  has  practically  ceased  since  it 
was  forbidden  by  the  Declaration  of  Paris  (1856) ;  but  it  is  cus- 
tomary for  states  to  use  merchant  ships  as  auxiliary  cruisers  and 
to  build  up  steamship  lines  by  subsidies,  demanding  conformity  to 
certain  specifications  as  to  size,  speed,  and  use  in  war. 

As  to  methods  of  warfare,  assassination  is  forbidden,  the  use  of 
poison  or  of  weapons  that  inflict  useless  suffering  is  condemn< 
and  devastation  of  the  enemy's  territory  is  prohibited  unless  "  im- 
peratively required  by  the  necessities  of  war."  Unfortified  places, 
if  unresisting,  may  be  occupied  but  not  attacked,  and  prisoners 
must  be  given  humane  treatment.  In  the  Geneva  Convention 
(1864)  the  hospital  service  was  neutralized  by  international  agree- 
ment. It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  rules  of  war  are 
not  binding  on  one  belligerent  if  broken  by  the  other  ;  that  in  time 
of  war  the  greatest  temptation  to  disregard  international  agreement 
exists ;  and  that  such  rules  do  not  attempt  to  regulate  war  among 
uncivilized  peoples,  or  between  civilized  peoples  and  savages,  where 
the  likelihood  of  violation  is  greatest. 

The  treatment  of  property  in  war  demands  particular  attention. 
Property  may  be  classified  as  public  or  private,  depending  on  owner- 
ship, and  its  capture  is  regulated  on  land  and  at  sea.  The  leading 
rules  of  international  law  concerning  it  may  be  summarized  as 
follows  : 

i.  On  land,  (a)  Public  property  of  a  military  character  or 
capable  of  military  use  may  be  captured  or  destroyed.  Property 
•used  for  religious,  charitable,  educational,  or  other  essentially  civil 
purposes  should  be  protected. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 


159 


(b)  Private  property  is  classified  as  real  or  personal.  The  former 
is  exempt  from  seizure  except  when  necessary  in  waging  war ;  but 
personal  property,  if  useful  in  war,  may  be  captured  or  taken  by 
requisition.  Requisition  must  be  made  in  accordance  with  the  law 
of  the  invading  state,  and  compensation  for  property  so  taken  is 
growing  increasingly  frequent.  Pillage  is  forbidden. 

2.  At  sea.  Public  and  private  vessels  of  the  enemy,  with  their 
contents,  may  be  captured  anywhere  except  in  neutral  waters.  The 
capture  of  enemy  property  in  neutral  ships  will  be  discussed  later.1- 
Vessels  captured  at  sea  are  called  prizes.  They  may  be  sent  in 
charge  of  a  prize  crew  to  some  home  port  of  the  captor,  or,  if  men 
cannot  be  spared,  may  be  destroyed  or  allowed  to  resume  their 
voyages  under  a  ransom  contract. 

Since  property  captured  at  sea  legally  belongs  to  the  captor's 
government,  it  may  be  used,  destroyed,  or  sold,  and  all  or  part  of 
the  proceeds  distributed  among  the  captors,  according  to  the  munic- 
ipal law  of  the  state.  To  decide  disputes  concerning  such  captures 
all  states  establish  prize  courts.  These  apply  the  principles  of 
international  law,  with  such  modifications  as  the  municipal  law  of 
their  own  state  may  make,  and  follow  the  precedents  of  prize 
courts  in  other  states.  Their  procedure  is  rather  more  of  an  inquest 
than  a  trial,  since  the  burden  of  proof  rests  on  the  person  who 
claims  that  the  capture  was  unlawful.  A  prize  court  never  sits  in 
neutral  territory,  and,  since  no  enemy  has  a  legal  status  before  it, 
the  interests  of  the  captured  vessel  must  be  represented  by  a  neu- 
tral or  by  a  citizen  of  the  captor's  state.  The  second  Hague  con- 
ference established  an  International  Prize  Court  to  hear  appeals  from 
national  prize  courts  ;  and  an  International  Naval  Conference,  com- 
posed of  delegates  from  the  ten  principal  maritime  states,  which 
met  at  London  in  1909,  laid  down  certain  rules  for  its  guidance 
concerning  blockade,  contraband  of  war,  destruction  of  captured 
vessels,  and  other  maritime  questions. 

The  law  dealing  with  enemy  persons  and  property  offers  many 
examples  of  doubtful  jurisdiction,  and  agreement  on  all  points  is 
hard  to  secure.  Persons  possess  enemy  character  in  different 
degree,  depending  upon  citizenship,  domicile,  temporary  residence, 

1  See  section  76. 


160         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

etc.  Property  partakes  of  enemy  character,  depending  upon  nation- 
ality or  residence  of  its  owner,  the  place  from  which  it  comes,  and 
the  control  exercised  over  it  by  belligerent  states.  Treaty  agree- 
ments covering  special  cases  have  removed  many  possibilities  of 
dispute,  and  international  conferences  bid  fair  to  secure  further 
uniformity. 

Belligerents  may  carry  on  nonhostile  intercourse  by  means  of 
flags  of  truce,  passports  or  safe-conducts,  licenses  to  trade,  and 
armistices  or  temporary  suspension  of  hostilities.  An  agreement 
regulating  nonhostile  intercourse  is  called  a  cartel,  and  an  agree- 
ment for  the  surrender  of  a  fortified  place  or  a  military  or  naval 
force  is  called  a  capitulation. 

Wars  are  almost  always  brought  to  a  close  by  a  treaty  of  peace. 
This  usually  settles  in  detail  the  points  in  dispute,  but  certain  con- 
sequences tollow,  as  defined  in  international  law.  Belligerent  rights 
cease,  and  private  rights,  suspended  during  the  war,  are  revived. 
In  the  absence  of  special  treaty  stipulations  the  rule  of  uti  possi- 
detis  legalizes  the  state  of  things  existing  at  the  time  that  peace 
is  declared. 

75.  Neutrality.  Neutrality  may  be  defined  as  "  the  condition  of 
those  states  which  in  time  of  war  take  no  part  in  the  contest,  but 
continue  pacific  intercourse  with  the  belligerents."  l  However, 
neutrality  must  be  distinguished  from  neutralization.  A  neutral 
state  or  person  may  cease  to  be  neutral  if  either  desires  ;  but  a  neu- 
tralized state,  person,  or  thing,  such  as  Belgium  and  Switzerland, 
or  the  hospital  service,  or  the  Suez  Canal,  is  set  apart  by  the  com- 
mon consent  of  states,  and  its  condition  is  involuntary. 

The  idea  of  neutrality  is  comparatively  recent.  In  former  times 
war  was  the  normal  condition,  and  noncombatants,  usually  weaker 
powers,  had  few  rights  that  were  respected,  and  were  allowed  to 
do  nothing  that  would  interfere  with  the  operations  of  belligerents. 
Gradually,  partly  through  self-interest  as  commerce  increased,  and 
partly  through  changing  ideas,  the  principles  that  noninterference 
and  impartiality  were  the  duty  of  neutrals,  and  that  respect  for 
neutral  sovereignty  was  the  duty  of  belligerents,  gradually  took 
form.  Until  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  little  more  than 

1  Lawrence,  Principles  of  International  Law,  p.  473. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW      161 

lip  service  was  given  to  these  principles ;  and  even  later,  states 
made  little  attempt  to  prevent  their  citizens  from  violating  them. 
The  insular  situation  of  England  and  her  policy  of  keeping  out 
of  European  wars,  and  the  position  taken  by  the  United  States 
from  the  beginning  of  its  existence,  laid  the  basis  for  modern 
neutrality. 

In  the  law  of  neutrality  a  distinction  may  be  made  between  the 
relation  of  state  to  state  and  of  state  to  individual.  The  former 
opens  up  the  question  of  the  duties  of  belligerents  to  neutrals  and 
of  neutrals  to  belligerents ;  the  latter  includes  such  topics  as  neu- 
tral commerce,  blockade,  and  contraband. 

The  duties  of  a  belligerent  state  to  neutral  states  may  be  outlined 
as  follows : l 

1 .  Refrain  from  carrying  on  hostilities  within  neutral  territory. 

2.  Refrain  from  making  direct  preparations  for  acts  of  hostility 
while  on  neutral  territory.    What  is  needed  to  maintain  life  or  to 
carry  on  navigation  may  be  obtained,  but  warlike  expeditions  must 
not  be  fitted  out  or  bases  of  supplies  established. 

3.  Obey  reasonable  regulations  made  by  neutral  states  for  pro- 
tecting their  territory.    Neutrals  may  restrict  the  use  of  their  ports, 
enforce  the  "  twenty-four-hour  "  rule,  or  make  other  regulations, 
but  must  treat  both  belligerents  alike. 

4.  Make  reparation  if  neutrality  is  violated.     In  this  case  the 
offending  belligerent  deals  entirely  with  the  offended  neutral,  who, 
in  turn,  deals  with  the  other  belligerent  if  it  also  suffered  from 
the  violation  of  neutrality. 

The  duties  of  neutral  states  to  belligerent  states  are  : 

1 .  Not  to  give  armed  assistance,  to  either  belligerent. 

2.  Not  to  allow  one  combatant  privileges  denied  tl\e  other. 

•  3.  Not  to  supply  belligerents  with  money  or  instruments  of  war- 
fare. Individual  citizens  or  corporations  in  a  neutral  state,  how- 
ever, may  finance  loans  or  furnish  munitions  of  war. 

4.  Not  to  allow  belligerents  to  send  troops  through  their  terri- 
tory or  to  levy  troops  therein. 

5.  Not  to  permit  belligerents'  agents  or  its  own  citizens  to  fit 
out  or  assist,  in  its  territory,  belligerent  expeditions. 

1  Lawrence,  Principles  of  International  Law,  Part  IV,  chaps,  ii,  iii. 


1 62          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

6.  Not  to  allow  its  subjects  to  enter  military  or  naval  service  of 
belligerents.     Occasional  individuals  cannot  ^be  prevented,  but  a 
large-scale  movement  should  be  restrained. 

7.  To  make  reparation  to  belligerents  injured  by  breach  of  neu- 
trality.  Such  cases  are  difficult  to  decide ;  but,  in  general,  the  injury 
must  be  specific  and  serious,  and  lack  of  due  diligence  on  the  part 
of  the  neutral  proved. 

76.  Neutral  commerce.  The  most  important  activity  of  indi- 
viduals with  which  the  law  of  neutrality  deals  is  neutral  commerce. 
Its  consideration  involves  the  following  questions  :  the  ownership 
of  the  goods,  the  nationality  of  the  vessel  carrying  them,  the  nature 
of  the  goods,  and  their  destination.  These  determine  what  goods 
are  liable  to  capture,  and  open  up  the  important  topics  of  blockade 
and  contraband. 

In  the  Middle  Ages  war  at  sea  was  little  better  than  piracy,  and 
commerce  was  never  safe.  In  the  first  great  maritime  code,  the 
Consolato  del  Mare,  the  fate  of  goods  depended  on  the  nationality 
of  their  owner,  those  belonging  to  citizens  of  belligerent  states  be- 
ing liable  to  capture,  wherever  they  were  found.  This  formed  the 
customary  practice  of  states  until  the  middle  of  the  last  century ; 
although  as  early  as  the  seventeenth  century  Holland,  usually  a 
neutral  with  a  large  carrying  trade,  urged  the  more  liberal  rule  that 
free  ships  make  free  goods.  This  doctrine,  basing  liability  to  cap- 
ture on  the  nationality  of  the  vessel,  was  incorporated  into  numer- 
ous treaties,  but  the  naval  preponderance  of  England,  who  opposed 
it,  for  a  long  time  prevented  its  general  acceptance.  Finally,  in 
the  Declaration  of  Paris  (1856)  the  great  powers  adopted  the 
following  rules  concerning  commerce  in  time  of  war: 

1.  The  neutral  flag  covers  enemy's  goods  with  the  exception  of 
contraband  of  war. 

2.  Neutral  goods,  with  the  exception  of  contraband  of  war,  are 
not  liable  to  capture  under  the  enemy's  flag.    Hence  at  present, 
except  for  contraband  of  war,  all  goods  in  neutral  ships,  and  even 
neutral  goods  in  belligerent  ships,  are  exempt  from  capture.    At 
the  second   Hague   conference  an  attempt  was  made  to  secure 
exemption  of  all  private  property  from  capture  at  sea,  but  oppo- 
sition, led  by  England,  prevented  the  acceptance  of  that  proposal. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW  163 

There  is  much  disagreement  as  to  what  constitutes  contraband 
of  war.  All  states  are  agreed  that  certain  articles,  useful  only  in 
warfare,  are  contraband,  and  that  other  articles  of  no  use  in  war 
are  not  contraband ;  but  between  these  extremes  are  many  things 
useful  in  both  peace  and  war,  concerning  which  no  definite  rules 
can  be  made.  Each  case  must  be  decided  on  its  merits,  depending 
upon  the  nature  of  the  goods  and  their  destination.  Besides, 
changing  conditions  make  many  things  contraband  that  were  for- 
merly useless  to  belligerents,  coal  and  armor  plate  at  thq  present 
time  being  examples.  Usually  states  possessing  a  large  commerce 
and  navy  advocate  an  extensive  contraband  list,  while  states  of 
little  maritime  importance  contend  for  greater  freedom  in  neutral 
trade.  A  fairly  definite  classification  of  goods  into  absolute  con- 
traband, conditional  contraband,  and  free  was  accepted  by  the  ten 
maritime  states  represented  at  the  London  International  Naval 
Conference  (1909). 

The  essentials  of  guilt  in  contraband  trade  require  that  contra- 
band goods  must  pass  outside  neutral  territory,  and  have,  directly 
or  indirectly,  a  belligerent  destination.  The  penalty  is  confiscation 
of  contraband  goods,  and  of  the  vessel  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the 
owner  was  aware  of  the  contraband  nature  of  its  cargo.  While  the 
furnishing  of  contraband  goods  to  a  belligerent  by  a  neutral  state 
is  sufficient  cause  for  war,  neutral  individuals  may  furnish  such 
materials  at  their  own  risk.  Neutral  states  are  not  required  to  in- 
terfere in  such  trade,  but  belligerents  are  expected  to  police  their 
frontiers  and  the  high  sea  sufficiently  to  prevent  contraband  goods 
reaching  their  destination. 

In  time  of  war  free  access  to  all  ports  is  permitted  to  all  mer- 
chant vessels;  except  in  case  of  blockade.  This  may  be  strategic, 
aiming  to  capture  the  blockaded  port ;  or  commercial,  aiming  to 
weaken  the  enemy's  resources  by  preventing  the  ingress  or  egress 
of  commerce.  Blockade  is  the  outcome  of  a  long  struggle  between 
the  claim  of  belligerents  to  wage  war  unhindered  and  of  neutrals 
to  carry  on  unrestricted  trade.  In  this  contest  each  side  has  made 
extreme  claims.  Belligerents  have  declared  absurd  "paper  block- 
ades "  that  they  could  not  enforce,  and  neutrals  have  tried  to 
restrict  blockade  in  such  ways  as  to  make  it  ineffective.  At  present 


1 64          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  international  rules  concerning  it  are  fairly  well  worked  out. 
A  blockade  is  binding  only  when  it  is  effective;  that  is,  when  ves- 
sels are  in  real  danger  if  they  attempt  to  pass  through.  Notice  of 
blockade  must  be  given,  some  attempt  must  be  made  to  evade  or 
violate  the  blockade  before  a  neutral  ship  may  be  captured,  and 
the  penalty  is  confiscation  of  ship  and  cargo.  According  to  the 
doctrine  of  continuous  voyage,  if  it  can  be  proved  that  a  vessel  or 
its  cargo,  nominally  bound  for  a  neutral  port,  is  ultimately  destined 
for  a  blockaded  port,  the  whole  voyage  is  a  continuous  one,  and 
the  vessel  or  cargo,  or  both,  depending  upon  their  respective  des- 
tinations, are  liable  to  capture.  The  offense  of  breaking  blockade 
clings  to  a  vessel  until  it  reaches  a  neutral  port,  unless,  meantime, 
the  blockade  be  raised.  The  offense  exists  only  so  long  as  the 
blockade  exists. 

To  make  effective  the  rights  of  belligerents  in  capturing  enemy 
property  at  sea,  seizing  contraband  of  war,  and  maintaining  effec- 
tive blockade,  it  is  necessary  that  they  should  also  have  the  right 
of  search,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  nationality  of  vessels, 
the  nature  of  their  cargoes,  and  their  destinations.  Public  armed 
vessels  of  a  state  are  not  liable  to  search  in  war  or  in  peace,  and  it 
is  still  a  controverted  point  whether  neutral  merchant  vessels  may 
be  visited  when  sailing  under  convoy  of  ships  of  war  of  their  own 
nation.  The  practice  of  convoy,  formerly  the  cause  of  much  dis- 
pute, is  falling  into  disuse,  largely  because  of  practical  difficulties  met 
in  uniting  into  a  single  fleet  vessels  of  different  rates  of  speed.  Bel- 
ligerent merchant  ships  are  justified  in  resistance,  flight,  or  decep- 
tion ;  but  neutral  merchant  ships  may  be  stopped  and  searched  by 
war  vessels  of  belligerents  anywhere  except  in  neutral  waters,  pro- 
vided the  international  rules  of  search  are  observed.  These  include 
inspection  of  the  ship's  papers  to  discover  its  nationality  and  des- 
tination and  the  nature  and  destination  of  its^  cargo.  If  the  papers 
are  unsatisfactory,  actual  inspection  of  the  cargo  is  permissible  ;  if 
they  are  regular,  showing  neutral  origin  and  destination  of  ship  and 
cargo,  the  vessel  is  allowed  to  proceed.  If  contraband  goods  with 
hostile  destination  are  found,  if  the  vessel  has  just  left  or  is  bound 
for  a  blockaded  port,  or  if  deceit  is  practiced  or  resistance  offered, 
the  ship  is  sent  into  port  as  a  prize. 


CONTENT  OF  INTERNATIONAL  LAW      165 

Since  neutral  vessels  and  property  are  presumably  exempt  from 
capture,  they  may  not  be  confiscated  until  judgment  has  been  pro- 
nounced by  admiralty  courts  after  due  legal  investigation.  Hence 
the  captor  is  under  obligation  to  conduct  the  visit  and  search  with 
proper  regard  for  the  safety  of  persons  and  property,  to  use  all 
reasonable  speed  in  bringing  in  the  captured  property  for  adjudi- 
cation, and  to  exercise  due  care  in  preserving  the  captured  vessel 
and  goods  from  loss  or  damage.  If  negligence  on  these  points  can 
be  proved,  compensation  is  due  to  the  injured  parties.  Neutral 
vessels  must  never  be  destroyed ;  if  captured  vessels  cannot  be 
brought  in  for  adjudication,  they  must  be  released. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XIII 

REFERENCES 

FORMS  OF  THE  STATE 

1.  AS  TO  TERRITORY 'AND  POPULATION 

a.  City  state 

b.  World  empire 

c.  National  state 

2.  AS  TO  LOCATION  OF  SOVEREIGNTY 

a.  Monarchy 

b.  Aristocracy 

c.  Democracy 
FORMS  OF  GOVERNMENT 

1.  DESPOTIC  AND  DEMOCRATIC 

2.  HEREDITARY  AND  ELECTIVE 

3.  UNITARY  AND  DUAL" 

4.  PARLIAMENTARY  AND  NONPARLIAMENTARY 
UNITARY  AND  DUAL  GOVERNMENTS 

1.  UNITARY 

2.  DUAL 

a.  Confederate- 

b.  Federal 

PARLIAMENTARY  AND  NONPARLIAMENTARY  GOVERNMENTS 
APPLICATION  TO  MODERN  STATES 


166 


CHAPTER  XIII 

FORM  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF  GOVERNMENT 

REFERENCES 
ARISTOTLE.  Politics,  Bk.  Ill 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  VI 
BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  68-82  ;  Vol. 

II,  pp.  1-40 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  pp.  119-123 
GARNER,  J.  W.  Introduction  to  Political  Science,  chaps,  v-vii 
LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  110-121 
LOWELL,  A.  L.  Essays  on  Government,  No.  I 
WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  chap,  xiii 
WILSON,  W.  Congressional  Government,  chap,  i         * 
WILSON,  W.  The  State,  chap,  xiii 
WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  I,  Part  III,  chap,  ii 

77.  Forms  of  the  state.  In  the  strict  sense  of  the  word  a 
classification  of  states  is  impossible.1  All  states  must  combine  the 
essential  elements, — territory,  population,  unity,  and  organization. 
All  states  are  alike  sovereign  and  therefore  perfect  and  equal. 
However,  an  examination  of  these  essentials  indicates  certain 
valuable  distinctions. 

From  the  standpoints  of  territory  and  population  states  may  be 
classified  according  to  their  total  area  or  total  numbers,  but  such 
classification  has  little  value  in  political  science.  Nevertheless,  one 
distinction  is  often  made  on  this  basis.  The  terms  "city  state," 
"national  state,"  and  "world  empire,"  while,  in  the  main,  mere 
historical  descriptions,  contain  fundamental  ideas  as.  to  the  relation 
of  geographic  and  ethnic  unity  to  state  existence,  and  are  perhaps 
the  most  logical  divisions  of  states  from  the  standpoint  of  their 
physical  elements.  States  that  include  a  number  of  more  or  less 
distinct  geographic  units  arid  widely  diverse  nationalities  must 
differ,  in  many  respects  from  those  with  compact  territorial  and 
ethnic  ioundatioris.  Mere  size  in  area  and  in  population  necessarily 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  351. 
r67 


1 68         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

affects  the  form  of  political  life,  and,  in  spite  of  the  theory  that 
states  are  legally  equal,  makes  them  far  from  equal  in  fact. 

The  requisite  of  unity  offers  no  basis  for  classification,  since  all 
states  must  alike  possess  it.  This  leaves,  then,  the  organization  of 
the  state  as  the  final  means  of  distinction.  In  their  governments 
states  show  greatest  diversity  and  offer  the  most  natural  basis  for 
classification.  It  may  be  asserted  that,  since  states  manifest  their 
existence  only  through  their  governments,  and  since  on  no  other 
basis  can  they  be  properly  distinguished,  a  classification  of  govern- 
ments is  in  essence  a  classification  of  states.  To  this  no  serious 
objection  can  be  urged  except  that,  in  maintaining  the  distinction 
between  state  and  government,  it  is  more  exact  to  indicate  that  the 
form  of  government  is  the  actual  basis  of  division. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  is  a  large  school  of  writers  who  do  not 
consider  the  state  completely  organized  in  its  government.  They 
narrow  government  to  the  ordinary  legislative,  executive,  and 
judicial  machinery,  excluding  such  irregular  or  infrequent  organs 
as  conventions,  plebiscites,  and  elections.  Accordingly  they  do 
not  locate  sovereignty  in  the  government  as  a  whole,  but  speak 
of  a  political  sovereignty  of  the  people,  behind  the  government, 
or  of  a  legal  sovereign,  consisting  of  some  part  of  the  govern- 
ment.1 From  this  standpoint  a  triple  distinction  between  state, 
sovereignty,  and  government  exists,  and  a  classification  of  states 
based  on  the  location  of  sovereignty  within  the  state  is  made.2 
Aristotle's  division,  then,  still  holds  good,  states  being  considered 
as  monarchies,  aristocracies,  or  democracies,  in  proportion  as  sov- 
ereign power  is  respectively  in  the  hands  of  one,  of  the  few,  or 
of  the  many. 

A  monarchy  is  almost  inconceivable  except  in  case  of  a  savage, 
tribal  state,  in  which  the  chief,  considered  as  a  representative  of 
the  gods,  is  the  sole  source  of  political  authority.  An  aristocracy 
exists  when  a  minority,  because  of  superior  organization,  intelli- 
gence, or  force,  is  able  to  maintain  supremacy.  The  feudal  states 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  Turkey,  and  Russia  before  the  war,  were 
examples.  A  democracy  indicates  that  civic  consciousness  has 

1  See  sections  49,  50. 

2  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  II.  chap.  iii. 


FORM  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF  GOVERNMENT     169 

spread  through  the  mass  of  the  population  and  developed  to  a 
certain  degree  of  intensity.  Under  such  conditions  the  majority 
cannot  long  be  prevented  from  exercising  sovereignty.  The  term 
11  majority"  is,  however,  only  an  approximate  one,  since  even  in  the 
widest  democracies  political  sovereignty  is  in  the  hands  of  a  frac- 
tional part  of  the  entire  population.  By  excluding  women,  minors, 
and  certain  classes  of  adult  males,  about  one  fifth  of  the  population 
are  active  citizens,  and  within  this  group  a  more  or  less  definite 
majority  controls.  Even  in  last  resort,  in  case  of  force,  a  minority 
of  the  entire  population  could  subdue  the  remainder.  With  these 
modifications  modern  leading  states  may  be  considered  democra- 
cies. While  the  sovereign  and  the  government  are  practically 
identical  in  an  aristocracy,  the  government  is  wider  than  the 
sovereign  in  a  monarchy  (i.e.  the  absolute  ruler  governs  with  the 
assistance  of  officials  who  receive  their  authority  from  him) ;  and 
the  government  of  a  democracy  is  always  aristocratic,  though  it 
receives  its  authority  from  the  mass  of  the  people. 

If,  as  before  indicated,  the  state  is  viewed  as  completely  organ- 
ized in  its  government,  with  sovereignty  located  in  the  government 
as  a  whole,  the  preceding  classification  of  states  is  not  valid.  What 
has  just  been  called  the  sovereign  becomes  then  a  part  of  the  gov- 
ernment, sharing  in  sovereign  power  only  when  actually  exercising 
it ;  and  a  classification  of  governments  into  monarchies,  aristocra- 
cies, and  democracies  is  so  evidently  indefinite  as  to  be  useless. 
Practically  all  modern  governments  contain  both  aristocratic  and 
democratic  elements,  and  many  retain  their  hereditary  monarch. 

This  discussion  may  be  summed  up  as  follows  :  Classification  of 
states  on  the  basis  of  territory  and  population  is  mere  description  ; 
classification  on  the  basis  of  unity  is  impossible.  From  the  stand- 
point of  sovereignty  states  are  essentially  alike,  —  equally  independ- 
ent of  each  other,  equally  supreme  over  their  citizens,  —  so  that  it 
is  only  by  assuming  a  sovereignty  back  of  the  government  that, 
depending  upon  its  location,  a  basis  for  distinction  is  obtained.  At 
all  events  no  difference  of  opinion  exists  as  to  the  possibility  of 
classifying  governments  ;  and,  since  the  government  of  each  state 
is  the  only  outward  manifestation  of  state  existence,  a  discussion 
of  the  main  types  of  organization  becomes  of  importance. 


170          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

78.  Forms  of  government.  While  no  dispute  exists  as  to  the 
possibility  of  classifying  governments,  there  is  no  such  consensus 
of  opinion  as  to  what  the  proper  classification  is.  It  will  therefore 
be  advisable  to  give  several,  based  on  different  points  of  departure, 
since  each  will  throw  additional  light  on  the  fundamental  nature  of 
the  state  and  of  government,  and  on  the  relation  of  the  state  to 
the  individuals  that  compose  it.  * 

1.  If  that  point  of  view  is  adopted  which  considers  each  state 
completely  organized  in  its  government,  and  which  considers  the 
government  as  including  the  sum  total  of  all  the  legal  political 
organizations  of  the  state,  whether  acting  at  irregular  and  infre- 
quent intervals  or  constantly  expressing  and  administering  state 
will,  —  in  this  case  the  fundamental  divisions  of  government  would 
be  despotisms  and  democracies^.1    This  classification,  however,  con- 
veys no  idea  of  structural  organization  or  method  of  functioning. 

(a)  By  despotism  is  meant  that  government  in  which  only  a  few 
persons  have  any  share  in  political  power,  and  in  which  the  mass 
of  the  people  take  no  part  at  any  time  in  exercising  or  legally 
influencing  governmental  authority.   Such  governments  were,  until 
recently,  represented  by  Persia,  Turkey,  Russia,  and  China. 

(b)  By  democracy  is  meant  that  government  in  which  a  large 
proportion  of  the  population  has  active  political  rights,  in  which 
possession  of  suffrage  and  elegibility  to  office  is  widespread,  and 
in  which  civic  consciousness  has  extended  over  the  mass  of  the 
people.     Such  governments  are  represented  by  the  majority  of 
modern  states,  —  the  British  Empire,  the  United  States,  Germany, 
France,  Switzerland,  and  the  Argentine  Republic  being  conspicuous 
examples. 

2.  Based  on  the  method  by  which  the  officials  of  government 
are  chosen,  governments  may  be  divided  into  hereditary  and  elec- 
tive.2  This  distinction  obviously  does  not  apply  to  tne'government 
as  a  whole,  since  in  no  state  is  it  entirely  hereditary  or  wholly  elec- 
tive.   It  does,  however,  indicate  the  general  method  by  which  states 
choose  their  governmental  heads  and  a  large  number  of  their  gov- 
erning officials. 

1  Leacock,  Elements  of  Political  Science,  p.  119. 

2  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  p.  9. 


FORM  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF  GOVERNMENT    171 

(a)  Hereditary  government  is  that  form  in  which  powers  are 
exercised  by  a  person  or  organization  of  persons  standing  in  certain 
family  relation  to  his  or  their  immediate  predecessors.    The  lead- 
ing forms  of  relationship  existing  in  modern  hereditary  govern- 
ments are  : 

(1)  Ancienneti ' :    the    oldest    member  of   the    family   of   the 
deceased,  regardless  of  sex,  succeeds  to  power. 

(2)  Anciennett  in  the  male  line  :    the  oldest  male  member  of 
the  family  of  the  deceased  succeeds. 

(3)  Primogeniture  :    the   oldest  immediate   descendant  of  the 
deceased,  regardless  of  sex,  succeeds ;  or,  in  case  of  no  issue,  the 
oldest  immediate  descendant  of  the  nearest  ancestor  of  the  de- 
ceased, regardless  of  sex. 

(4)  Primogeniture  in  the  male  line  :    the  oldest  immediate  male 
descendant  of  the  deceased  succeeds  ;  or,  in  case  of  no  male  issue, 
the  oldest  immediate  male  descendant  of  the  nearest  male  ancestor 
of  the  deceased.   The  English  principle  in  the  descent  of  the  crown 
is  a  modification  of  primogeniture  in  the  male  line.     It  prefers 
males  to  females  of  the  same  parentage,  but  admits  females  of  the 
same  parentage  as  the  last  male  ruler,  in  preference  to  males  of  a 
more  remote  parentage. 

(5)  Appointment  in  royal  family  :    ruler  allowed  to  appoint  the 
member  of  his  or  her  family  who  shall  succeed. 

(b)  Elective  government  is  that  form  in  which  powers  are  exer- 
cised by  persons  chosen  by  the  suffrage  of  other  persons.    Such 
election  may  be  : 

(1)  Direct:    suffrage  holders  vote  directly  for  the  persons  to 
hold  office. 

(2)  Indirect :  suffrage  holders  vote  for  smaller  group,  and  this 
in  turn  votes  for  persons  to  hold  office. 

Both  these  methods  have  advantages  and  are  usually  combined 
in  modern  states.  Besides,  appointment  and  competitive  examina- 
tion are  largely  used  in  selecting  government  officials. 

In  addition  to  these  distinctions  governments  of  modern  states 
differ  on  two  fundamental  points.  The  first  has  to  do  with  what 
is  ordinarily  called  division  of  powers,  that  is,  the  distinction 
between  national  and  various  degrees  of  local  governments  ;  the 


172          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

second,  with  separation  of  powers,  or  the  distinction  between  legisla- 
tive and  administrative  departments.  Governments,  therefore,  may 
be  divided  into  : 

1 .  Unitary  and  dual.1    Depending  upon  the  relation  which  the 
various  governmental  organizations  bear  to  each  other  and  to  the 
state. 

2.  Parliamentary'2'  and  nonparliamentary?     Depending  upon 
the  relation  of  the  legislature  to  the  executive. 

79.  Unitary  and  dual  governments,  i.  Unitary  government  is 
that  form  in  which  governmental  authority  is  fundamentally  vested 
in  a  single  organization,  and  all  other  organizations  of  government 
within  the  state  owe  thei:  existence  to,  and  receive  their  authority 
from,  this  body.  For  convenience  in  administration  the  state  may 
be  divided  into  districts  with  local  governments  of  their  own,  but 
these  act  only  as  agents  of  the  central  authority  and  have  little 
protection  against  central  interference  or  control.  Such  a  form  is 
best  adapted  to : 

(a)  A  state  possessing  geographic  and  ethnic  unity. 

(b)  A  state  whose  population  is  composed  of  different  and  hos- 
tile nationalities.    In  this  form,  which  is  usually  transitional,  some 
single  authority  must  unite  the  otherwise  antagonistic  elements. 

(c)  A  state  whose  population  is  not  yet  politically  developed, 
and  hence  not  fitted  for  local  self-government.    Such  a  condition 
also  may  be  regarded  as  transitional. 

2.  Dual  government  is  that  form  in  which  ordinary  govern- 
mental authority  is  divided  fundamentally  between  two  organiza- 
tions, each  having  its  own  definite  sphere  of  authority,  and  neither 
having  the  power  to  interfere  with  or  destroy  the  other.  Dual 
government  may  be  subdivided  into  : 

(a)  Confederate.    In  this  form  several  states,  each  with  its  own 
government,  create  a  common  government  for  certain  common 
purposes. 

(b)  Federal.    In  this  form  a  single  state  exists,  with  the  func- 
tions of  government  divided  between  a  central  organization  and 
several  commonwealth  organizations. 

1  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  p.  4. 

2  Often  called  cabinet.  3  Often  called  presidential. 


FORM  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF  GOVERNMENT     173 

This  distinction  may  be  made  more  clear  by  the  following  dia- 
grams : 


CONFEDERATION 


FEDERATION 


In  the  above  confederation  there  are  four  sovereign  states 
(A,  B,  C,  D),  each  with  its  own  internal  government  (i,  2,  3,  4) 
and  one  common  central  government  (X).  In  the  above  federa- 
tion there  is  one  sovereign  state,  with  a  central  government  (X) 
and  with  four  commonwealth  governments  (i,  2,  3,  4).  In  the 
confederation  sovereignty  remains  in  each  component  unit,  and 
their  relations  are  only  of  treaty  nature ;  in  the  federation  sover- 
eignty resides  in  the  state  as  a  whole,  and  the  component  units 
are,  legally,  nothing  more  than  convenient  government  areas. 

The  confederation  is  evidently  a  temporary  form  of  government, 
and  usually  results  in  a  growing  spirit  of  unity  in  consequence  of 
which  a  single  state  is  formed,  the  government  usually  remaining 
federal.  It  is  of  course  possible  for  the  states  in  confederation  to 
destroy  the  common  government  and  remain  entirely  separate.  At 
the  present  time  no  good  example  of  a  confederation  exists,  although 
the  Swiss,  German,  and  American  confederations  are  comparatively 
recent.  Federations,  which  will  be  discussed  in  a  separate  chapter,1 
have  become  common  in  the  past  century,  and  further  develop- 
ment of  the  state  promises  to  be  largely  along  that  line. 

80.  Parliamentary  and  nonparliamentary  governments. ,  i.  Par- 
liamentary or  cabinet  government  is  that  form  in  which  the  tenure 
of  office  of  the  real  executive  is  dependent  on  the  will  of  the  legis- 
lature. The  real  executive,  or  cabinet,  forms  at  the  same  time  a 
committee  of  the  legislature,  sharing  in  both  the  creation  and  the 

1  See  Chapter  XIV. 


174         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

administration  of  law.  Under  this  form  the  legislature  controls  the 
administration,  and  no  independent  action  of  the  executive,  unless 
approved  by  the  legislature,  can  be  successful.  Since  the  legis- 
latures of  most  modern  states  consist  of  two  houses,  the  admin- 
istration, in  practice,  tends  to  come  under  the  control  of  that  house 
which  has  grgalej^ower  over  money  affairs,  —  usually  the  loj&er, 
house.  Parliamentary  government  is  invariably  found  in  those 
states  that  have  a  noaiinaL-execiitive.  It  is  well  adapted  to  a  state 
wishing  to  retain  a  hereditary  monarch  after  the  state  has  become 
democratic,  as  in  the  case  of  England,  Italy,  and  the  Netherlands  ; 
but  the  nominal  executive  may  be  an  elected  officer,  as  is  the 
French  president. 

Such_^_sy_stem  has  the  advantage  of  securing  harmony  between 
the  different  departments  of  government,  and  the  presence  of  the 
heads  of  administration  in  the  legislature  keeps  it  informed  on  the 
questions  with  which  it  must  deal,  and  makes  its  policy  more  con- 
sistent than  is  possible  where  legislation  is  shaped  by  numerous 
and  often  ignorant  committees.  On  the  other  hand,  it  sacrifices 
the  independence  of  the  executive  and  of  one  of  the  houses,  and, 
in  states  where  more  than  two  political  parties  exist,  leads  to 
unstable  coalitions  and  to  a  scramble  for  power  at  the  expense  of 
consistent  principle. 

2.  Nonparliamentary  or  presidential  government  is  that  form  in 
which  the  tenure  of  office  of  the  executive  is  independent  of  the 
legislature,  and  in  which  the  power  of  the  executive  is  sufficient  to 
prevent  legislative  encroachment.  In  few  states  is  the  separation 
complete.  Impeachment  and  removal  of  the  executive  by  the  legis- 
lature for  certain  offenses  and  the  power  to  override  an  executive 
veto  are  usually  found  in  nonparliamentary  governments ;  but  the 
general  principle  that  the  tenure  and  prerogatives  of  the  executive 
are  ordinarily  free  from  legislative  interference  characterizes  this 
type.  Under  this  form  of  government  the  nominal  executive  is  the 
real  head  of  the  state,  whether  he  be  a  hereditary  monarch,  as 
was  the  German  emperor,  or  an  elected  president,  as  in  the 
United  States. 

Such  a  system  has  the  advantage  of  concentrating  responsibility 
and  thus  securing  caution.  It  is  also  energetic  and  powerful, 


FORM  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF  GOVERNMENT      175 

because  free  from  that  hesitation  or  disagreement  which  often 
accompanies  a  plural  executive.  It  is  well  adapted  to  states  that 
include  sections  widely  diverse  in  interests,  or  that  have  federal 
governments,  and  in  time  of  war,  or  when  foreign  affairs  are  of 
chief  importance,  is  especially  valuable.  On  the  other  hand,  there 
is  the  constant  danger  of  deadlock  between  legislature  and  execu- 
tive, and  the  importance  of  the  executive  office  makes  times  of 
election,  in  those  states  where  the  office  is  thus  filled,  periods  of 
disturbance,  and  in  turbulent  states  even  of  revolution. 

81.  Application  to  modern  states.  If  the  above  canons  of  dis- 
tinction are  applied  to  leading  modern  states,  a  remarkable  lack  of 
uniformity  is  found.  On  the  basis  of  the  first  distinction  alone  do 
the  great  states  agree.  While  a  few  backward  parts  of  the  earth 
are  still  despotic,  all  the  enlightened  states  are  democratic,  in  the 
sense  that  civic  consciousness  and  political  rights  are  widespread. 
The  second  classification  shows  the  British  Empire,  Italy,  Spain, 
Greece,  Japan,  and  the  Netherlands  to  be  hereditary  ;  while  the 
United  States,  France,  Switzerland,  Germany,  and  all  the  Ameri- 
can republics  are  elective.  The  third  classification,  into  unitary 
and  dual  governments,  shows  an  enormous  numerical  supremacy 
for  the  former,  as  England,  France,  and  the  majority_of_Eiup- 
pearuand  American_states  are  included  .  /  H  owever,  the  United 
any',  Switzerland,  Mexico,  Brazil,  Argentine  Republic, 


Venezuela  serve  as  examples  of  the  federal  typjejThe  fourth 
^division,  into  parliamentary  and  nonparliamentary,  gives  a  still 
different  arrangement.  The  majority  of  European  governments 
are  parliamentary  ;  but  Canada,  if  considered  separate  from  the 
British  Empire,  is  the  only  part  of  America  organized  in  that  * 
way.  tTHe  United  States  and  all  the  American 


_ 

parliamentary,  and  this  class  also  includes  SwitzerlandAnd  several  A 
minor  European  states. 

An  analysis  of  the  governments  of  the  United  States,  England,  tr 
Germany,  and  France  shows  that,  while  they  are  all  democratic,  ch 
England  is  hereditary  and  the  United  States,  Germany,  and  France 
are  elective  ;  England  and  France^re  unitary  find  the  UmtedJStates 

are  dual  (federal)  ;  England,  France,  and  -Germany  N 


are  parliamentary  and  the  United  States  is  nonparliamentary.    An 

aj  f 


176         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

interesting  fact  in  this  connection  is  that  while  in  the  former 
German  Empire  the  hereditary  monarch  was  the  real  executive,  in 
England  he  is  a  mere  figurehead  ;  and  that  the  elected  president 
in  the  United  States  possesses  powers  much  like  those  of  the 
earlier  monarchs,  while  the  elected  president  in  France  is  in  much 
the  same  position  as  the  hereditary  king  of  England. 

While  leading  governments  thus  disagree  in  their  fundamental 
organization,  the  relations  of  states  to  their  citizens  and  the  work- 
ings of  modern  governments  in  actual  practice  show  marked  simi- 
larity. The  government  of  each'  state  is,  after  all,  a  unit  whose 
business  it  is  to  express  and  administer  the  state's  will,  and  the 
liberty  that  modern  states  grant  to  individuals  and  the  general 
functions  that  governments  perform,  suggest  similarity  rather  than 
contrast.  The  form  of  government  depends  largely  upon  historic 
evolution  and  upon  local  conditions,  but  the  fundamental  relation 
of  the  government  to  the  state  on  one  side  and  to  the  individual  on 
the  other  is  not  widely  variant  at  present  in  the  chief  states. 

If,  on  the  basis  of  the  preceding  classification,  present  tenden- 
cies in  governmental  forms  are  examined,  several  points  of  interest 
may  be  discovered.  It  seems  scarcely  necessary  to  state  that  the 
modern  political  world  is  drifting  away  from  despotic  government. 
All  enlightened  states  have  already  emerged  from  that  form  ;  and, 
as  political  consciousness  arises  in  the  few  states  where  it  still  lies 
dormant,  they  also,  by  peaceful  or  revolutionary  processes,  must 
extend  a  share  in  political  power  to  a  constantly  widening  class. 

Hereditary  government  is  also  declining.  The  last  century  has 
witnessed  the  establishment  of  a  number  of  states  without  that 
element  in  their  organization,  and  in  those  states  where  it  remains 
as  a  remnant  of  feudal  times  it  is  growing  increasingly  unpopular. 
All  over  Europe  hereditary  monarchs  have  been  compelled  to 
resign  executive  authority  to  cabinets  responsible  to  elected  legis- 
latures, and  the  hereditary  upper  houses  have  lost  power  to  popu- 
larly chosen  assemblies.  Whether  the  officials  of  future  states  will 
be  chosen  by  direct  election,  by  indirect  election,  by  appointment, 
by  civil-service  examination,  or  by  a  combination  of  several  or  all 
of  these,  it  is  difficult  to  foretell ;  but  that  the  "accident  of  birth" 
will  play  a  part  of  diminishing  importance  seems  inevitable. 


FORM  OF  THE  STATE  AND  OF  GOVERNMENT    177 

From  the  standpoint  of  the  third  and  fourth  canons  no  such 
definite  tendencies  can  be  discovered.  On  the  contrary,  there 
seems  to  be  a  strong  movement  toward  compromise  in  both 
respects.  Those  states  that  have  been  most  centralized  in  their 
organization  show  a  tendency  toward  federalization,  especially  in 
administration.  The  growth  of  colonial  empires  and  the  demo- 
cratic development  that  demands  local  self-government  are  both 
opposed  to  the  complete  unitary  system.  At  the  same  time  mod- 
ern federations  are  becoming  more  centralized.  The  growth  of 
common  interests,  of  common  external  policy,  and  the  necessity 
for  uniformity  in  legislation  tend  to  increase  the  authority  of 
the  central  government  and  to  reduce  the  commonwealths  to  the 
position  of  administrative  districts. 

A  similar  condition  exists  relative  to  parliamentary  and  nonpar- 
liamentary  organization.  In  parliamentary  governments  there  is 
a  movement  toward  greater  independence  on  the  pa^t  of  the  execu- 
tive ;  in  nonparliamentary  governments  the  necessity  for  harmony 
in  procedure  and  policy  leads  to  a  closer  connection  between  execu- 
tive and  legislature.  The  work  of  political  parties,  which  perform 
similar  functions  under  both  forms,  further  tends  to  break  down 
the  distinction. 

What  form  the  governments  of  the  future  will  take  it  is  difficult 
to  predict,  but  present  tendencies  indicate  an  elective  democracy, 
combining  certain  elements  of  both  unitary  and  federal  forms 
and  certain  elements  of  both  parliamentary  and  nonparliamentary, 
forms.  Striking  illustrations  of  these  general  tendencies  are 
shown  by  the  facts  that  while  the  United  States  has  been  building 
up  a  federal  empire,  England  is  agitating  imperial  federation,  and 
that  while  the  English  prime  minister  and  cabinet  are  becoming 
more  independent  of  Parliament  and  more  directly  responsible  to 
the  people,  the  United  States,  in  its  Speaker  and  Steering  Com- 
mittee, is  creating  a  prime  minister  and  cabinet,  the  leaders  of  the 
party  in  power  in  Congress. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XIV 

REFERENCES 
FORMS  OF  UNION 

1.  UNORGANIZED 

a.  Alliances 

b.  Protectorates 

2.  ORGANIZED 

a.  International  administrative  unions 

b.  Monarchial  unions 

(1)  Personal 

(2)  Real 

c.  Confederations 

NATURE  OF  FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT 

DISTRIBUTION  OF  POWERS 

ADVANTAGES  AND  DISADVANTAGES  OF  FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT 

1.  ADVANTAGES 

2.  DISADVANTAGES 


!78 


CHAPTER  XIV 

FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT 

REFERENCES 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  VI,  chap,  xxiv 

BRYCE,  J.  The  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  I,  chaps  xxvii-xxx 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  131-184 

BURNETT,  E.  C.  The  Government  of  Federal  Territories  in  Europe 

FEDERALIST,  THE.  Essays  XV-XVII 

FREEMAN,  E.  A.  History  of  Federal  Government 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  233-257 

MERRIAM,  C.  E.  American  Political  Theories,  chaps,  vii,  viii 

MERRIAM,  C.  E.  History  of  the  Theory  of  Sovereignty  since  Rousseau,  chaps,  ix,  x 

SIDGWICK,  H.  The  Development  of  European  Polity,  chaps,  ix,  xxix 

SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chap,  xxvi 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  American  Constitutional  System 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  chap,  x 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  II,  Part  III,  chap,  viii 

82.  Forms  of  union.  One  of  the  most  striking  features  of  re- 
cent political  development  is  the  formation  of  various  degrees  of 
union  among  states.  A  consideration  of  the  nature  of  these  unions, 
their  effect  on  the  sovereignty  of  the  component  states,  and  the 
forms  of  government  thus  established  will  serve  to  introduce  a 
more  important  type  of  political  life,  —  the  federation.  Con- 
siderable difficulty  confronts  an  attempt  to  classify  these  unions, 
although  German  writers  have  worked  out  elaborate  subdivisions.1 
A  fundamental  distinction  may  be  made  between  unorganized^ and 
organized  unions. 

In  the  former,  states  enter  into  relations  for  regulation  of  mu- 
tual interests,  but  form  no  common  government,  each  state  acting 
through  its  own  governmental  organs.  In  the  latter,  permanent 

1  Jellinek,  Das  Recht  des  modernen  Staates  ;  Die  Lehre  von  den 

Staatenverbindungen. 

Laband,  Das  Staatsrecht  des  deutschen  Reiches. 
Brie,  Theorie  der  Staatenverbindungen. 
Waitz,  Das  Wesen  des  Bundesstaates. 
179 


l8o         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

central  organs  of  government  are  created.  Examples  of  unorgan- 
ized unions  are  alliances  for  offense  or  defense,  for  guarantee 
of  neutrality,  etc. ;  and  protectorates,  in  which  a  certain  control, 
usually  over  foreign  relations,  is  exercised  by  a  stronger  over  a 
weaker  state.  A  special  form,  called  by  German  writers  Staaten- 
staat,  is  the  union  of  a  superior  and  an  inferior  state,  "  the  latter 
receiving  orders  from  the  former  as  from  a  foreign  power,  but  the 
citizens  of  the  inferior  state  owing  allegiance  only  to  their  own 
state."  1  Of  such  unions  the  relation  of  the  medieval  German 
Empire  to  its  feudal  components  and  of  Turkey  to  Egypt  are 
examples. 

The  exact  effect  of  such  associations  on  the  sovereignty  of  the 
component  states  is  one  of  the  most  difficult  points  in  political 
science.  Every  treaty  is  at  least  a  formal  limitation  on  sovereignty, 
since  in  it  the  sovereign  promises  to  do  or  to  refrain  from  doing 
certain  things,  or  to  act  in  a  certain  manner.  But  as  long  as  the 
states  forming  such  unions  are  free  to  withdraw  from  them,  or  if 
force  is  the  only  method  to  maintain  or  extend  their  provisions, 
the  sovereignty  of  the  separate  states  remains.  Therefore,  unless 
such  unions  have  reached  the  point  at  which  one  party  has  become 
a  mere  province  of  the  other,  which  may  legally  alter  their  relations 
as  it  sees  fit,  there  is  no  legal  union.  Each  state  retains  its  sover- 
eignty, and  no  step  toward  a  permanent  fusion  of  separate  states  is 
involved.  In  actual  practice,  however,  a  clear  distinction  is  often 
impossible,  and  international  usage  is  not  consistent. 

Organized  unions,  possessing  a  common  government,  may  be 
divided  into : 

1.  International    administrative   unions,    in    which    permanent 
commissions  are  created  by  two  or  more  states  for  the  regula- 
tion of  certain  common  interests.    Examples  are  the  international 
postal  and  telegraph  unions,  and  the  commission  that  regulates 
the  navigation  of  the  Danube. 

2.  Monajchial  unions,  in  which  states,  retaining  their  separate 
sovereignties  and  constitutional  rights,  are  joined  under  a  common 
ruler.    If  this  union  is  deliberate,  resting  on  a  permanent  provision 
for  such  connection,  it  is  called  a  realunion.    Of  such  a  nature 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  235. 


FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT  l8l 

was  the  relation,  until  recently,  of  Norway  and  Sweden.  Austria- 
Hungary,  although  possessing  additional  common  governmental 
organs,  is  another  example.  If  union  under  a  common  ruler  is 
accidental,  through  descent  or  other  circumstance,  it  is  called  a 
personalunion.  Such  have  been  the  relations  between  England 
and  Hanover,  and  between  Holland  and  Luxemburg.  Such  unions 
last  only  during  the  reign  of  the  common  monarch,  who  may  be 
regarded  as  possessing  separate  political  personalities  in  each  of 
the  states. 

3.  Confederations,  in  which  states  create  a  common  govern- 
ment and  delegate  to  it  authority  over  certain  affairs,  each  state 
having  its  own  government  for  all  affairs  not  delegated  to  the 
central  government.  The  essential  nature  of  a  confederation,  as 
before  indicated,1  is  the  fact  that  the  states  composing  it  retain 
their  sovereignty  and  are  legally  free  to  withdraw  from  it  if  they 
so  desire. 

The  point  of  similarity  in  all  these  forms  of  unions,  unorganized 
ancTbfganized,  is  that  they  are  not  states.  In  each  case  sovereignty 
is  located  in  the  units  composing  them,  the  relations  are  essentially 
international,  and  no  juristic  union  exists.  In  no  case  is  there  any 
authority,  outside  of  these  component  units,  with  the  right  to  de- 
termine its  own  competence  or  to  exercise  coercion.  While  the 
unions  may  differ  in  degree  from  mere  alliances,  in  which  there 
is  no  common  government  and  the  mutual  interests  are  of  the 
slightest  nature,  to  confederations,  in  which  a  common  govern- 
ment may  be  given  large  and  varied  powers,  —  in  essence  they 
are  alike.  They  are  agreements  among  states  and  not  states 
themselves. 

83.  Nature  of  federal  government.  In  contrast  to  the  various 
forms  of  union  among  states  may  be  considered  that  type  of 
political  life  in  which  the  separate  units,  retaining  their  govern- 
ments and  control  over  certain  internal  interests,  have  lost  their 
sovereignty  and  exist  as  component  parts  of  a  single  state.  As 
previously  indicated,2  governments,  in  so  far  as  the  relation  of 
central  to  local  authorities  is  concerned,  show  two  main  types,  — 
the  unitary,  and  the  dual.  This  is  largely  the  result  of  the  historic 

1  See  section  79.  2  Ibid. 


1 82          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

development  of  modern  national  states  from  medieval  feudalism. 
Even  earlier,  however,  the  dual,  or  federal,  principle  had  been 
worked  out  to  a  degree  in  the  various  leagues  of  the  Greek  city 
states,  in  the  famous  Achaean  League  approaching  closely  the  for- 
mation of  a  real  federal  state.  As  growing  national  spirit  and 
improving  organization  began,  toward  the  close  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  to  expand  the  areas  of  political  units,  two  methods  mainly 
were  followed  : 

i.  One  was  that  of  complete  fusion,  the  separate  governments 
of  the  combining  units  being  merged  into  a  single  organization. 
Sometimes  this  took  place  voluntarily  and  peacefully  when  a  spirit 
of  nationality  was  well  developed  and  local  differences  slight,  as  in 
the  case  of  England  and  Scotland,  or,  more  recently,  in  the  for- 
mation of  the  kingdom  of  Italy.  Usually  it  resulted  from  conquest 
and  expansion,  as  a  more  powerful  state  extended  its  boundaries, 
regardless  of  the  wishes  of  the  peoples  that  it  incorporated,  and  at 
the  expense  of  their  local  political  organization.  Such  was  the 
formation  of  the  French  kingdom  and  of  the  British  Empire  as  a 
whole.  By  both  of  these  processes,  however,  states  with  unitary 
governments  were  formed.  The  component  parts  either  lost  their 
identity  completely  or  became  mere  districts  of  administration, 
subordinated  legally  to  the  authority  of  the  central  government. 

Cj.  The  other  method  was  that  of  voluntary  federal  union, 
tes  whose  nationality  or  situation  was  such  as  to  make  union 
desirable,  but  whose  local  differences  were  -too  great  to  permit 
complete  amalgamation,  or  whose  strength  was  too  nearly  equal 
to  make  conquest  possible,  were  able  to  unite  on  this  basis.  The 
component  parts  retained  their  government,  with  constitutional 
rights  over  certain  affairs,  but  they  gave  up  their  sovereignty  to 
the  new  state  that  was  formed  by  their  union.  A  central  govern- 
ment was  created  with  certain  powers,  but  neither  central  nor  local 
governments  could  legally  encroach  upon  or  destroy  the  other. 
Such  a  state  was  usually  formed  after  a  gradual  process,  passing 
through  various  degrees  of  alliance  and  confederation  before  the 
necessary  national  spirit  arose.  Examples  of  such  states  are  the 
United  States,  the  German  republic,  Switzerland,  and,  considered 
apart  from  the  British  Empire,  Canada  and  Australia.  Several 


FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT  183 

states,  including  Mexico  and  Brazil,  have  voluntarily  adopted  the 
federal  principle,  not  as  a  means  of  union,  but  for  the  purpose  of 
adjusting  national  and  local  interests. 

The  political  process  by  which  a  federation  is  formed  and  the 
location  of  sovereignty  within  it  are  much-disputed  questions.  It 
has  often  been  held  that  a  federation  is  formed  by  voluntary  union 
of  sovereign  states,  as  if  a  new  state  could  be  created  by  a  compact 
among  states.  Evidently  such  an  agreement  would  be  merely  a 
treaty,  since  by  that  method  alone  can  states  enter  into  mutual 
relations.  Besides,  such  a  compact  would  be  valid  only  so  long  as 
the  contracting  states  retained  the  sovereignty  that  made  them 
competent  to  enter  into  it.  By  a  contract  it  is  impossible  to  create 
an  authority  superior  to  the  contracting  parties ;  hence  a  union 
formed  on  this  basis  could  be  nothing  more  than  a  confederation 
of  states.  No  single  sovereign  would  exist,  each  state  would  be 
competent  to  determine  its  own  rights  and  attributes,  and  any 
common  government  that  might  be  created  would  derive  its 
authority  from  the  individual  states  that  it  severally  represented. 

In  forming  a  federation,  therefore,  it  must  be  held  that  the 
separate  states  disappear,  their  sovereignty  being  destroyed ;  and 
their  citizens,  having  divested  themselves  of  the  old  allegiance, 
create,  on  the  basis  of  national  unity,  a  federal  state.  The  forma- 
tion of  a  federation,  like  the  formation  of  every  state,  is  a  revolu- 
tionary act.  Its  foundation  rests  not  on  the  authority  of  any 
preexisting  political  body  but  on  itself.  The  former  units  reappear 
as  commonwealths  under  the  federal  constitution,  but  their  sover- 
eignty is  gone,  and  they  differ  in  no  essential  legal  way  from 
administrative  districts.  However  powerful  their  historic  associa- 
tions may  be,  or  however  large  may  be  the  powers  delegated  to 
them,  they  owe  their  position  and  powers  to  a  superior  authority 
and  have  no  legal  status  except  in  the  union.  Not  the  amount  of 
powers  exercised,  but  the  right  to  determine  how  much  power 
they  may  exercise,  determines  sovereignty,  and  this  right  the 
former  states  have  lost. 

In  a  federation,  then,  sovereignty  lies  neither  in  the  federal 
government  nor  in  the  commonwealths.  Neither  is  it  divided 
between  them,  as  many  writers  of  the  early  nineteenth  century 


1 84          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

held.  It  resides  in  the  state  itself,  both  central  and  local  govern- 
ments being  its  agents,  neither  being  able  to  determine  its  own 
competence  or  to  destroy  the  other.  In  the  federal  constitution 
both  governments  are  created  and  their  respective  powers  outlined  ; 
and  in  the  sum  total  of  all  legal  lawmaking  bodies  in  the  state, 
federal  and  commonwealth,  including  those  bodies  that  may  legally 
amend  the  constitutions,  the  exercise  of  sovereignty  is  vested. 

84.  Distribution  of  powers.  In  federations  the  distribution  of 
powers  between  the  central  and  the  various  local  governments  be- 
comes of  prime  importance.  While  differences  in  detail  character- 
ize this  feature,  modern  federal  states  show  sufficient  uniformity 
to  make  general  statements  possible.  All  agree  in  giving  to  the 
central  government  control  over  certain  functions  essential  to  state 
existence,  such  as  the  maintenance  of  army  and  navy,  the  conduct 
of  foreign  affairs,  and  the  power  to  raise  money.  In  addition,  such 
functions  as  the  regulation  of  coinage  and  currency,  of  patents 
and  copyrights,  of  naturalization,  and  of  the  postal  service,  which 
are  of  value  only  when  uniform  over  the  entire  state,  are  generally 
given  to  the  central  government.  At  the  other  extreme  are  affairs 
of  local  concern  alone,  or  those  demanding  different  treatment 
because  of  sectional  differences,  that  are  properly  left  to  the 
governments  of  the  component  units. 

Between  these  lies  a  vast  field  of  interests  concerning  whose 
control  the  practice  of  present  federations  and  the  opinions  of 
statesmen  show  marked  divergence.  This  list  includes  such  ques- 
tions as  the  regulation  of  transportation  and  communication,  of 
labor,  of  marriage  and  divorce,  of  public  education,  and  of  civil 
and  criminal  law.  In  the  authority  over  these  interests  granted  to 
the  central  government,  the  constitutions  of  federations  differ. 
That  of  the  United  States  is  practically  silent  on  these  points, 
and  the  clause  leaving  to  the  commonwealths  all  powers  not  ex- 
pressly granted  to  the  national  government  evidently  was  intended 
to  remove  them  from  federal  jurisdiction.  The  constitution  of  the 
German  republic  grants  to  the  central  government  additional  au- 
thority over  banking,  criminal  and  civil  law,  railroads,  insurance, 
and  minor  matters.  In  Switzerland,  while  the  power  to  levy  direct 
taxes  is  withheld,  the  central  government  has  authority  over 


FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT  185 

railroads,  factory  labor,  insurance,  alcoholic  liquors,  etc.,  together 
with  certain  powers  over  religion  and  education.  In  the  federal 
governments  of  Canada  and  Australia,  each  of  which  rests  on  a 
statute  of  the  British  Parliament,  similar  wide  powers  are  granted 
to  the  central  organs. 

In  all  these  federations  there  is  a  marked  tendency  toward  in- 
creasing authority  on  the  part  of  the  central  government.  This  is 
partly  due  to  the  changing  conditions  of  modern  life.  Large-scale 
production,  the  development  of  transportation  and  communication, 
wider  markets,  and  increasing  interdependence  of  sections  for- 
merly economically  independent  cannot  fail  to  affect  correspond- 
ingly the  powers  of  government.  Not  only  is  the  spirit  of  unity 
increased,  but  interests  formerly  local  outgrow  regulation  at  the 
hands  of  any  except  the  widest  governmental  authority.  Modern 
business  is  national  or  even  international  rather  than  local.  Be- 
sides, the  creation  of  a  federation  is  itself  a  step  toward  further 
unity.  The  existence  of  a  common  government,  whose  working  be- 
comes increasingly  familiar  to  all  citizens,  cannot  fail  to  strengthen 
the  national  spirit,  whose  beginnings  at  least  the  federation  indi- 
cated. Common  action,  particularly  in  war  or  foreign  relations, 
increases  national  at  the  expense  of  local  patriotism  ;  and  the  for: 
mer  units,  losing  their  political  identity,  tend  to  become  mere  con- 
venient districts  of  administration.  Integration,  accompanied  by  \ 
differentiation  and  interdependence,  seems  a  law  in  the  political  / 
as  well  as  in  the  biologic  world. 

In  adjusting  the  legal  distribution  of  powers  to  this  tendency 
toward  national  unity  several  methods  are  in  use.  Ease  of  amend- 
ment, by  which  change  in  conditions  and  in  sentiment  may  express 
themselves  through  the  written  constitution,  redistributing  authority 
as  occasion  demands,  is  one  way  of  meeting  the  situation.  The 
constitution  of  Switzerland,  which  demands  for  amendment  only 
the  assent  of  a  majority  of  the  voters  and  of  the  component  can- 
tons, is  an  example.  The  plan  of  concurrent  jurisdiction,  in  which 
the  powers  of  the  governments  are  not  declared  exclusive,  allowing 
the  local  governments  to  act  where  the  federal  government  has 
not  done  so,  providing  that  their  acts  are  not  inconsistent  with 
federal  laws,  serves  a  similar  purpose.  In  this  way  the  central 


1  86          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

government  may  expand  its  authority  as  national  development  re- 
quires, acting  in  a  legal  way  and  at  the  same  time  avoiding  fre- 
quent tinkering  with  the  constitution.  Such  concurrent  jurisdiction 
is  provided  in  the  constitutions  of  the  German  republic  and  of 
Australia.  When  a  federal  constitution  excludes  each  government 
from  sharing  the  authority  of  the  other,  and  is  also  difficult  to 
amend,  neither  of  these  processes  is  possible.  If,  in  addition,  the 
powers  granted  to  the  central  government  are  limited,  the  situation 
is  particularly  difficult.  This  is  the  case  in  the  United  States  Con- 
stitution, and  has  been  met  in  a  peculiar  way.  By  the  doctrine  of 
"  implied  powers  "  the  Supreme  Court,  in  interpreting  the  Consti- 
tution, has  stretched  its  meaning  to  give  the  central  government 
authority  never  dreamed  of  by  its  founders.  The  brevity  of  the 
Constitution,  making  an  elastic  interpretation  possible,  and  the 
political  ability  of  the  American  people  have  enabled  a  constitu- 
tion, framed  at  a  time  '  when  local  differences  prevented  large 
grants  of  federal  power,  to  adapt  itself  to  the  growing  spirit  of 
national  unity  and  to  the  changed  conditions  of  modern  life. 

85.  Advantages  and  disadvantages  of  federal  government.  The 
chief  purposes  for  which  states  exist  may  be  summed  up  as  exter- 
nal protection  and  internal  regulation.  From  the  standpoint  of  the 
former,  extension  of  the  state  over  considerable  area  is  desirable, 
both  in  removing  the  possibility  of  conflict  among  separate  units 
and  in  increasing  the  efficiency  of  the  whole.  In  former  times 
conquest  was  the  only  effective  method  of  state  extension.  In  this 
proces's  the  weak  were  subordinated  to  the  strong,  often  with  the 
loss  of  their  political  privileges,  and  danger  of  external  conflict 
was  merely  changed  to  danger  of  internal  revolt  as  soon  as  oppor- 
tunity offered.  From  the  standpoint  of  internal  regulation  the  only 
effective  method  known  to  early  states  was  that  of  rigid  uniform- 
ity, enforced  by  a  central  authority  over  the  entire  area  of  the  state. 
This  policy  of  external  conquest  and  internal  uniformity  was  per- 
fected by  Rome.  However,  it  sacrificed  the  individual,  prevented 
progress,  and  fell  to  pieces  from  the  evils  inherent  in  the  system. 

small  irnits-^ould  unite 


^peacefully  without  sacnficm^Jiiek>f»a1iticnl  life,  so  that 
could  form  a  contented  and  integra]_rjarjLJof.  the  whole.    Besides, 


FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT  187 

some  method  must  be  found  to  combine  uniform  regulation  of 
common  interests  and  local  control  of  local  affairs,  so  as  to 
combine  stability  arid  progress,  — .union  and  liberty. 

Federation  is  the  method  by  which  several  modern  states  have 
solved  this  problem.  Voluntary  union  on  practically  equal  terms 
has  made  possible  incorporation  without  conquest.  The  control  of 
general  interests  by  a  central  government,  leaving  questions  that 
differ  in  different  sections  to  the  people  of  those  areas  for  solution, 
combines  the  strength  that  results  from  unity  with  the  vitality  and 
progress  that  result  from  variety.  In  foreign  affairs  a  united  front 
may  be  presented  and  a  consistent  policy  pursued  ;  at  the  same  time, 
each  internal  unit  may  shape  its  laws  in  conformity  with  local 
customs  and  conditions.  With  the  exception  of  representation, 
probabh^nothinjp1  has  Hone  more  to  make  democracy  workable 
ovejMarge  areas  than  the  principle  of  federal  government. 
stimulates  interest  in '  political  activity,  enables  small  areas  to 
try  experiments  that  might  be  fatal  in  larger  units,  diminishes 
the  dangers  that  threaten  a  state  composed  of  diverse  nationalities 
or  interests,  and  relieves  the  central  government  of  many  burden- 
some functions.  Under  special  conditions  federation  is  particu- 
larly valuable.  It  enables  a  growing"  spirit  of  nationality  and  unity 
to  manifest  itself T  eve.n  ffrnngh  Wai  Hiffprpprps  are  powerful  enough 
tojgeyent  cgrnp1^  f"«fcm  ;  and,  as  a  means  of  expansion  and 
development  in  a  new  country,  allows  special  needs  to  be  met  as 
they  arise,  and  frontier  conditions  t-°  he  dealt  with  in  a  way  un- 
suited  to  longer-established  sections.  The  formation  of  Germany 
and  the"  "U "iiited  -States  and  the  growth  of  the  latter  serve  as 
examples.  Federalism  has  thus  been  the  means  of  uniting  many 
small  states  which  otherwise  would  never  have  surrendered  their 
independence  ;  at  the  same  time,  in  the  internal  organization  of 
the  large  state  formed  by  their  union,  the  federal  system  has  pre- 
vented the  rise  of  a  despotic  centralized  authority  and  has  con- 
served the  political  liberty  of  the  people. 

The  advantages  of  the  federal  system,  if  misused,  make  possible 
corresponding  dangers.  If  disputes  or  divided  authority  that  should 
be  limited  to  internal  affairs  are  carried  into  foreign  relations,  a 
federation  is  handicapped  when  opposed  to  a  more  centralized 


1 88          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

state.  Similarly,  if  affairs  of  general  interest  demanding  uniform 
treatment  are  left  to  the  caprices  of  a  number  of  governments, 
evils  follow.  As  conditions  change,  what  might  formerly  have 
been  safely  left  to  the  separate  units  for  decision  may  later  demand 
regulation  on  a  larger  scale.  The  proper  adjustment  of  central  to 
local  governments  thus  becomes  a  constant  source  of  difficulty,  and 
the  danger  of  rebellion  or  the  formation  of  sectional  factions  is 
always  present.  To  all  these  defects  —  weakness  in  foreign  affairs, 
lack  of  uniformity  in  legislation  or  administration,  and  disputes 
concerning  the  powers  of  national  and  commonwealth  governments 
—  history  and  present  conditions  in  the  United  States  bear  wit- 
ness. The  expense  and  delay  caused  by  a  double  system  in  which 
much  work  is  needlessly  duplicated  are  recognized  as  serious 
objections  to  federal  government,  and  the  unsuitability  of  the  sys- 
tem to  a  people  disinclined  to  reverence  the  law  and  unwilling  to 
acquiesce  in  frequent  compromises  is  obvious. 

In  recent  years  some  of  the  defects  of  federal  government  have 
become  particularly  noticeable.  This  is,  in  the  main,  the  result  of 
the  growing  importance  and  complexity  of  economic  and  industrial 
conditions,  which  demand  uniformity  of  regulation.  Hence  atten- 
tion is  no  longer  turned  to  the  obvious  strength  of  the  federal 
system  on  its  political  and  external  side,  but  to  the  weakness  of 
the  system  on  its  economic  and  internal  side ;  and,  as  that  indus- 
trial integration  which  seems  to  be  the  present  method  of  economic 
progress  continues,  the  federal  form  of  organization  may  be  com- 
pelled to  give  way  to  a  more  centralized  government,  capable  of 
regulating,  or,  if  need  be,  of  taking  control  of  the  extensive 
economic  activities  of  modern  civilization.1 

Naturally,  then,  there  is  considerable  difference  of  opinion  con- 
cerning the  future  of  federal  government.  The  form  of  organiza- 
tion suited  to  one  people  or  to  one  time  may  be  entirely  unsuited 
to  another  society  or  another  stage  of  development.  The  federal 
system  was  created  by  the  needs  of  the  times,  and,  having  accom- 
plished its  purpose,  it  may  prove  to  be  but  the  transition  stage  to  a 
more  efficient  system,  better  suited  to  the  conditions  then  existing. 

1  Leacock,  "  Limitations  of  Federal  Government,"  Proceedings  of  the  Amer- 
ican Political  Science  Association,  Vol.  V  (1908), 


FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT  189 

.At  the  same  time  there  are  certain  advantages  inherent  in  fed- 
eralism, and  some  of  its  contributions  to  political  methods  will 
probably  be  permanently  valuable.  While  federal  states  show  signs 
of  closer  unification,  unitary  states  are  adopting  many  features  of 
'federalism.  Germany,  Mexico,  and  Brazil  have  deliberately  chosen 
to  adopt  the  federal  form  of  organization  ;  almost  all  the  self- 
governing  British  colonies  are  now  combined  in  federated  groups ; 
and  imperial  federation  for  the  British  Empire  is  seriously  urged. 
Present  political  expediency,  as  well  as  past  political  necessity, 
has  found  value  in  federalism,  and  many  writers  predict  a  further 
unification  of  states,  at  present  independent,  on  a  federal  basis. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XV 

REFERENCES 

NATURE  OF  CONSTITUTIONS 

1.  WRITTEN  AND  UNWRITTEN  CONSTITUTIONS 

2.  CONSTITUTIONAL  AND  STATUTE  LAW 

a.  As  to  method  of  creation 

b.  As  to  content 

REQUISITES  OF  CONSTITUTIONS 


2.  COMPREHENSIVE  f**J 

3.  BRIEF 

4  P  'C^ 

CREATION  OF  CONSTITUTIONS 
AMENDMENT  OF  CONSTITUTIONS 


, 

I.    DEFINITE 


1.  ADVANTAGES  OF  SPECIAL  METHOD  OF  AMENDMENT 

2.  METHODS  IN  USE 

a.  Ordinary  legislation 

b.  Special  organs  or  special  procedure 

c.  Popular  referendum 

3.  QUERIES  CONCERNING  CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENT 

a.  In  case  no  provision  for  amendment  is  made 

b.  In  case  amendment  is  forbidden 

c.  In  case  legal  method  of  amendment  is  provided 


190 


CHAPTER  XV 

CONSTITUTIONS 

REFERENCES 

AMES,  H.  V.  Amendments  to  the  Constitution 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  VI,  chap,  xiv 

BORGEAUD,  CH.  Adoption  and  Amendment  of  Constitutions 

BOUTMY,  E.  Studies  in  Constitutional  Law 

BRYCE,  J.  Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence,  Essays  III,  IV-VIII 

BRYCE,  J.  The  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  I,  chaps,  xxxi-xxxv 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  90-173 

COOLEY,  T.  M.  Constitutional  Limitations  9 

DICEY,  A.  V.  The  Law  of  the  Constitution 

DODD,  W.  F.  Modern  Constitutions 

HILL,  M.  Liberty  Documents,  chaps,  ii,  vi-x,  xvii 

JUDSON,  H.  P.  The  Essential  Elements  of  a  Written  Constitution 

McCLAiN,  E.  Cases  on  Constitutional  Law 

McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  chaps,  i,  ii 

SIDGWICK,  H., Elements  of  Politics,  pp.  534-545 

SMITH,  J.  A.  The  Spirit  of  American  Government,  chaps,  i-iv 

STEVENS,  C.  E.  Sources  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 

STORY,  J.  Commentaries  on  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  pp.  211-219 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  I,  Part  II,  chap,  vi 

86.  Nature  of  constitutions.  I  The  fundamental  principles  that 
determine  the  form  of  a  state  are  called  its  constitution.)  These 
include  the  method  in  which  the  state  is  organized,  the  distribution 
of  its  sovereign  powers  among  the  various  organs  of  government, 
and  the  scope  and  manner  of  exercise  of  governmental  functions.) 
The  constitution  does  not  create  the  state,  but  is  the  outward 
formulation  of  state  existence.  Every  state,  therefore,  has  a  con- 
stitution. In  recent  years  it  has  become  customary  for  states  to  put 
certain  of  these  principles  into  written  documents,  calling  these 
their  constitutions,  and  a  distinction  is  often  made  between  those 
states,  such  as  the  United  States,  Germany,  and  France,  having 
written  constitutions ;  and  others,  such  as  England  and  Hungary, 
whose  organizations  rest  upon  long-standing  custom  or  upon  scat- 
tered laws,  variously  created. 

191 


192          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

In  reality  this  distinction  is  of  little  value.  No  constitution  is 
entirely  written  or  entirely'  unwritten.  That  of  England,  largely 
unwritten,  contains  such  written  documents  as  Magna  Charta,  the 
Bill  of  Rights,  the  Act  of  Settlement,  and  the  statutes  of  the  past 
century  regulating  the  system  of  representation  and  the  exercise 
of  suffrage.  On  the  other  hand,  the  United  States  Constitution, 
fundamentally  written,  includes  many  principles  not  found  in  that 
document,  —  the  organization  and  powers  of  political  parties,  the 
method  of  choosing  the  president,  and  the  opposition  to  a  third 
term  serving  as  examples. 

It  is  often  thought  that  a  written  constitution  safeguards  indi- 
vidual liberty,  acting  as  a  check  on  the  arbitrary  authority  of  gov- 
ernment. This  is  not  necessarily  true,  depending  upon  whether  or 
not  constitutional  provisions  may  be  changed  by  the  ordinary  gov- 
ernment. The  constitution  of  Italy,  though  written,  may  be  legally 
changed  by  a  regular  act  of  the  Italian  Parliament,  and  nothing 
but  public  opinion  stands  between  government  and  individual. 
Even  when  restrictions  are  placed  on  governmental,  organs,  the 
question  of  enforcing  these  restrictions  remains.  The  new  Ger- 
man constitution  grants  elaborate  civil  rights  and  provides  for 
amendment  by  popular  vote.  The  United  States  alone  makes 
the  courts  a  legal  check  on  unconstitutional  governmental  activity. 
A  written  constitution  does  not  in  itself  guarantee  individual 
freedom. 

Another  distinction  often  erroneously  emphasized  is  that  between 
constitutional  law  and  statute  law,  considering  the  former  of  supe- 
rior, and  the  latter  of  inferior,  validity.  A  preceding  chapter1  indi- 
cated the  fallacy  of  this  point  of  view.  From  a  legal  standpoint  all 
laws  are  commands  of  the  sovereign,  enforced  by  its  authority. 
Any  organ  of  government,  acting  legally  within  the  scope  of  its 
authority,  creates  law  just  as  binding  as  is  the  constitution.  When 
a  law  is  declared  "  unconstitutional,"  it  is  not  considered  that  a 
lower  law  has  come  into  conflict  with  a  higher  law,  but  that  the 
law  in  question  never  was  law,  since  it  was  not  properly  created. 
There  is,  then,  no  difference  in  validity  between  constitutional  law 
and  statute  law.  Each,  if  legally  created  and  enforced  by  the 

1  See  Chapter  X. 


CONSTITUTIONS  193 

authority  of  the  state,  is  law,  equally  binding.    Distinction  between 
constitutional  and  statute  law  may  be  made  : 

1.  As  to  method  of  creation.    Statute  law  is  usually  created  by 
the  ordinary  government  ;  that  is,  by  legislatures,  either  national  or 
local,  with  original  or  derived  powers.    Constitutional  law  in  many 
states  is  created  by  a  peculiar  organ  of  government  or  by  unusual 
procedure  on  the  part  of  the  ordinary  government.    In  some  states, 
as  in  England  and  Italy,  even  this  distinction  does  not  exist, 
since  constitutional  law  is  created  and  repealed  by  the  ordinary 
government.    A  later  section  l  will  consider  the  various  methods 
of  creating  constitutional  law. 

2.  As  to  content.    Constitutional  law,  as  already  indicated,  prop- 
erly deals  with  the  fundamental  organization  of  the  state.    The 
minor  details  of  government  and  the  ordinary  relations  of  man 
to  man  are  properly  left  to  statute  law. 

The  nature  of  constitutions,  accordingly,  may  be  summed  up  as  j 
follows.    The  form  of  a  state  is  called  its  constitution.    In  all  states 
this  is  partly  unwritten  and  partly  written.    In  so  far  as  it  is  unwrit- 
ten, enforced  only  by  public  opinion,  it  is  not  strictly  law  ;  while 
the  written  constitution  often  contains  elements  that  are  not  prop- 
erly constitutional.    No  difference  in  validity  exists  between  consti- 
tutional law  and  statute  law,  since  each  -is  law  only  if  legally  created 
and  enforced  by  the  sovereignty  of  the  state.    As  to   method 
of  creation  or  nature  of  content,  constitutional  lav/,  often  formed 
in  an  extraordinary  way,  and  outlining  in  general  the  nature  and 
powers  of  government,  may  be  distinguished  from  such  detailed 
rules  of  administrative  law  or  such  regulation  of  private  affairs  as 
are  created  by  the  ordinary  government.  .The  constitution  of  a  t 
state,  therefore,  consists  of  that  mass  of  custom,  those  fundamental  _ 
andjoften  rcvolutionary^formed  principles,  and  such 
by  special  or  regular  organs,  as,  combined, 


ization  of 

.  -8£r  Requisites  of  constitutions.    A  good  constitution  possesses 
several  general  characteristics.    It  is  : 

I  .  Definite.   In  order  to  avoid  occas4on  for  dispute,  there  should 
be  no  question  as  to  what  the  constitution  is  or  what  it  means.    In 

1  See  section  88. 


194          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

this  respect  written  constitutions,  if  carefully  worded,  are  more 
satisfactory  than  unwritten  constitutions.  From  the  time  of  the 
Ten  Commandments  and  the  Twelve  Tables  of  Roman  law,  the 
tendency  in  legal  development  has  been  toward  definite  statement, 
so  that  the  law  may  be  known  and  preserved. 

2.  Comprehensive.     The  constitution  should  cover  the  whole 
field  of  government.    In  a  general  way,  at  least,  it  should  make 
provision  for  the  exercise  of  all  political  power,  and  sketch  out  the 
fundamental  organization  of  the  state. 

3.  Brief.    In  outline  alone  should  the  constitution  organize  the 
state.    There  are  several  objections  to  a  detailed  code. /An  exten- 
sive constitution  offers  many  possibilities  for  dispute  as  to  meaning. 
Besides,  a  detailed  constitutions/indicates  distrust  of  government. 

^Legislatures  deteriorate  and  avoid  responsibility  if  matters  of  impor- 
tance are  removed  from  their  authority  and  decided  in  the  consti- 
tution. Finally,  a  >aetailed  constitution  is  soon  outgrown^New 
conditions  render  some  of  its  provisions  obsolete,  and,  either  by 
frequent  amendment  or  by  nonenforcement,  it  becomes  unstable  or 
unrespected.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  contains  about 
four  thousand  words ;  that  of  the  German  republic  is  several 
times  as  long.  The  "  constitutional  laws  "  of  France,  combined 
with  the  "  organic  laws,"  which  are  properly  a  part  of  the  con- 
stitution, are  a  trifle  less  extensive  than  the  constitution  of  the 
German  republic.  On  the  other  hand,  recent  constitutions  drawn 
up  by  several  of  the  American  commonwealths  contain  upwards 
of  fifty  thousand  words,  including  minute  regulations  that  have 
no  proper  place  in  a  constitution. 

Given  a  constitution  that  is  definite,  comprehensive,  and  brief, 
its  necessary  contents  demand  consideration.  Its  purpose  is  to 
create  a  government,  outline  the  powers  of  its  various  organs,  and 
prescribe  the  general  manner  of  their  exercise.  It  should  also  pro- 
vide a  method  of  amendment,  and  set  aside  a  sphere  of  individual 
liberty  into  which  no  part  of  the  ordinary  government  may  enter. 
A  further  analysis  shows  that  the  constitution  indicates  the  various 
divisions  and  departments  of  government.  It  prevents  encroach- 
ment of  one  organ  of  government  on  another,  or  on  individual 
liberty.  In  a  word,  it  locates  sovereignty  within  the  state  ;  since,  in 


CONSTITUTIONS  195 

outlining  the  powers  of  the  various  governmental  organs  and  in 
providing  a  method  of  changing  the  constitution,  arrangement  is 
made  for  the  total  legal  exercise  of  lawmaking  power.  The  action 
of  any  organ  outside  the  scope  of  its  legal  competence,  or  in  any 
manner  except  that  prescribed,  is  not  an  act  of  the  state,  but  a 
revolution,  and  can  be  justified  only  on  the  ground  that  the  former 
state  was  destroyed,  a  new  one  created,  and  sovereignty  relocated. 
An  "  unconstitutional  law  "  is  thus  a  contradiction  in  terms. 

A  final  requisite  dernands  that  a  constitution  shall  correspond 
to  existing  conditions  within  the  state.  Sovereignty  should  be 
legally  distributed  in  accordance  with  actual  political  power ;  that 
is,  the  potential  sovereign  should  coincide  with  the  legal  sovereign, 
otherwise  there  is  constant  danger  of  revolution.  No  constitution 
is  perfect,  since  the  best  form  of  government  is  a  relative  term, 
changing  as  conditions  change.  A  constitution,  therefore,  should 
be  flexible  enough  to  permit  change  when  necessary ;  at  the  same 
time,  its  modification  should  not  be  so  easy  as  to  sacrifice  stability. 
The  adjustment  of  these  requisites  depends  largely  upon  the 
method  of  amendment. 

88.  Creation  of  constitutions.  The  constitution  of  a  state  comes 
into  existence  with  the  state  itself,  arising  from  the  feeling  of  unity 
which  creates  the  state  and  of  which  the  constitution  is  the  formal 
expression.  Serving  as  the  starting  point  of  law,  its  own  origin  is 
found  in  revolution.  Sometimes  by  gradual  process  a  people  pass 
from  unorganized,  unpolitical  life,  through  various  forms  of  con- 
trol, into  a  state ;  more  often,  by  force  or  by  agreement,  preexist- 
ing political  forms  are  disrupted  or  combined,  and  new  states  arise 
on  old  foundations. 

Of  those  constitutions  resting  partly  on  custom  and  usage,  partly 
on  a  series  of  decrees  and  statutes,  that  of  England  is  the  best 
remaining  example.  The  successive  revolutions  by  which  it  was 
formed  were  less  violent  than  is  usually  the  case ;  and  for  this 
reason,  probably,  it  still  remains  largely  in  unwritten  form,  and 
what  is  written  is  scattered  through  different  acts  instead  of  being 
concentrated  in  a  single  document.  In  the  beginning  of  England's 
national  life  the  laws  of  the  strong  Norman  monarchy  were  grafted 
on  Anglo-Saxon  customary  usage.  The  granting  of  Magna  Charta 


196          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

marked  the  revolution  that  changed  a  monarchic  into  an  aristo- 
cratic constitution.  The  growth  of  political  consciousness  led  to 
further  fundamental  changes  by  which  sovereignty  was  increasingly 
exercised  by  popular  representatives ;  and  later  revolutions,  or,  as 
they  are  usually  called,  reforms,  widened  the  suffrage  and  reappor- 
tioned  representation.  At  the  same  time,  political  parties  and  the 
cabinet  system  were  growing  up,  largely  as  a  matter  of  convention 
rather  than  of  law.  In  this  process  the  constitution  followed 
changes  in  actual  conditions  with  but  little  violence,  often  retain- 
ing old  forms  after  they  had  become  mere  fictions.  The  constitu- 
tion of  Hungary  had  a  similar  development. 

Within  the  last  century  and  a  half  most  states  have  drawn  up 
written  constitutions.  This  idea  originated  in  America,  resulting 
from  the  charters  granted  to  the  commercial-colonial  companies 
that  opened  up  the  New  World.  In  addition  to  land  grants  and 
trading  monopolies,  these  charters  provided  a  frame  of  govern- 
ment, and  when  the  company  migrated  to  America,  it  soon 
formed  a  political  rather  than  a  commercial  corporation.  Another 
step  toward  the  formation  of  written  constitutions  resulted  from 
the  covenants  or  agreements  for  self-government  that  the  American 
colonists  drew  up.  Of  these  the  most  important  were  the  May- 
flower  compact  (1620)  and  the  Fundamental  Orders  of  Connecti- 
cut (1639).  These  were  created  partly  because  the  colonists,  cut 
off  from  England  and  neglected  by  her,  needed  some  form  of 
authority  ;  and  partly  in  imitation  of  the  colonial  system  of  self- 
government  in  church  affairs.  Even  in  England,  during  the  time 
of  Puritan  supremacy,  similar  ideas  held  sway,  and  Cromwell's 
Instrument  of  Government  (1653)  was  practically  a  written  con- 
stitution. However,  the  restoration  of  monarchy  (1660)  destroyed 
this  constitutional  tendency  in  England,  while  in  the  colonies  it 
developed  without  interference.  It  was  then  quite  natural  that  the 
colonies,  on  becoming  independent  of  England,  should  draw  up 
written  constitutions  (1776-1780),  and  that  the  same  idea  was  ex- 
perimented with  in  the  confederation  (1781)  and  perfected  in  the 
federal  Constitution  (1789).  The  revolutionary  basis  of  this  docu- 
ment is  evident  when  it  is  remembered  that  it  went  into  effect 
when  ratified  by  nine  "  states,"  although  the  existing  confederation 


CONSTITUTIONS  197 

required  unanimous  consent  for  its  dissolution.  This  instrument, 
practically  unchanged  in  letter  though  broadened  in  spirit,  still 
serves  as  the  framework  around  which  the  government  of  the 
United  States  is  built. 

During  her  revolution  France,  in  imitation  of  America,  created 
a  series  of  written  constitutions  (1791-1799)  ;  and  although  none 
of  these  was  permanent,  the  idea  survived  in  France  and  in- 
fluenced the  remainder  of  Europe.  Under  Napoleon  constitutions 
were  issued  to  various  Italian  states,  and  temporary  constitutions 
were  declared  in  Spain.  To  appease  the  liberal  tendency  of  the 
times  and  to  secure  united  support  in  war  against  Napoleon,  con- 
stitutions were  promised  by  several  rulers  and  actually  granted  in 
a  few  German  states,  but  the  reactionary  movement  that  followed 
the  downfall  of  Napoleon  checked  for  a  time  constitutional  growth. 
After  the  Revolution  of  1848  a  number  of  written  constitutions 
were  issued,  and  while  some  were  destroyed  in  the  reaction  that 
followed,  the  principle  has  never  since  lost  ground.  At  present, 
with  the  exception  of  England,  Hungary,  and  the  despotic  mon- 
archies, all  the  important  states  of  Europe  and  America  have 
written  constitutions,  and  even  commonwealths  and  colonies  are 
organized  on  the  basis  of  fundamental  written  documents. 

The  present  constitution  of  France  was  the  outcome  of  the 
Franco- Prussian  War  of  1870.  When  Sedan  fell  and  the  emperor 
was  captured,  the  imperial  government  of  Napoleon  III  fell  to 
pieces.  The  Third  Republic  was  proclaimed  by  the  leaders  in 
Paris,  and  a  National  Assembly,  elected  by  manhood  suffrage, 
ruled  from  1871  to  1876  and  created  the  present  constitution. 
While  the  majority  in  this  body  favored  monarchy  they  were  not 
united ;  hence  a  republic  was  established,  which  few  believed 
would  be  permanent.  For  this  reason  the  constitution,  drawn  up 
in  1875,  was  a  mere  outline,  leaving  many  things  to  be  settled  by 
ordinary  legislation  and  providing  an  easy  method  of  amendment. 
The  Assembly,  accordingly,  made  a  distinction  between  : 

1.  Constitutional  laws,  which  can  be  amended  only  by  special 
process. 

2.  Organic  laws,  which  can  be  changed  by  ordinary  process  of 
legislation. 


198          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  only  important  amendment  of  constitutional  law  was  in 
1884,  when  the  composition  and  powers  of  the  upper  house  were 
changed  and  left  on  an  organic  basis.  The  organic  laws  dealing 
with  the  election  of  the  lower  house  have  been  several  times 
changed. 

The  original  constitution  of  the  German  Empire  was  also  the 
result  of  war  and  revolution.  In  this  case,  however,  it  crystallized 
national  spirit  and  created  a  state  out  of  formerly  separate  sover- 
eignties. In  1815,  when  Napoleon's  work  was  undone,  a  loose 
German  confederation,  under  the  presidency  of  Austria,  was  at 
least  sufficient  to  prevent  entire  separation.  The  customs  union 
(Zollverein)  formed  by  Prussia  in  1833  gradually  came  to  include 
all  the  German  states  except  Austria,  laying  the  basis  for  later 
political  union  and  Prussian  supremacy.  From  1848  to  1850 
most  of  the  German  states  secured  written  constitutions,  and  an 
attempt  was  made  at  the  same  time  to  form  a  closer  union  under 
the  headship  of  Prussia.  For  this  plan  the  time  was  not  yet  ripe, 
but  in  1866  the  final  break  between  Prussia  and  Austria  led  to  a 
brief  war  in  which  Austria  was  defeated  and  excluded  from  Ger- 
man affairs.  This  destroyed  the  confederation  of  1815,  Prussia 
and  the  adjacent  states  forming  the  North  German  Confederation, 
the  states  of  south  Germany  remaining  outside.  A  new  customs 
union  (1868)  and  secret  treaties  bound  together  these  two  sections, 
and  Prussia's  brilliant  military  successes  in  the  Franco-Prussian 
War  fused  them  into  a  unity.  The  south  German  states  entered 
the  North  German  Confederation ;  the  Prussian  king  was  urged 
by  the  other  rulers  to  take  the  title  of  German  Emperor,  and  in 
1871  a  parliament  of  all  Germany  ratified  the  constitution.  The 
present  constitution  of  the  German  republic  was  adopted  in  1919. 

89.  Amendment  of  constitutions:  The  vital  point  in  a  constitu- 
tion is  its  method  of  amendment.  Upon  that  depend  the  guarantee 
of  individual  liberty  and  the  degree  to  which  the  written  constitu- 
tion corresponds  with  actual  political  conditions.  If  the  constitution 
may  be  changed  by  the  ordinary  method  of  legislation,  as  is  the 
case  in  the  unwritten  constitution  of  England  and  in  the  written 
constitution  of  Italy,  the  individual  has  no  legal  protection  against 
the  government.  The  distribution  of  powers  within  the  government 

l-^WM^^M^^*""^1**1™^^^*"""^"^"^ 


CONSTITUTIONS  199 

may  give  him  legal  protection  against  certain  organs,  and  by 
the  consent  of  the  government  he  may  enjoy  certain  immunities 
against  the  entire  government,  but  at  any  time  these  may  be 
modified  or  destroyed  by  ordinary  legislative  methods.  If  the  con- 
stitution cannot  be  changed  by  the  usual  method  of  legislation,  as 
is  the  case  in  most  states,  individual  liberty  enjoys  a  certain  pro- 
tection against  the  ordinary  government.  The  actual  working  out 
of  this  principle  depends  upon  the  method  of  enforcing  the  con- 
stitution. In  the  absence  of  courts  that  have  the  right  to  decide 
between  government  and  individual,  nothing  short  of  revolution 
(except  for  a  mere  protest)  can  prevent  governmental  encroach- 
ment, in  spite  of  constitutional  provisions.  This  was  exemplified 
in  Prussia,  where  king  and  upper  house  for  a  time  (1860-1865) 
controlled  taxation  regardless  of  the  constitutional  rights  of  the 
lower  house.  In  the  United  States  the  enforcement  of  constitu- 
tional limitations  rests  in  the  courts.  This  serves  as  a  special 
guarantee  of  individual  liberty,  with  the  corresponding  disadvan- 
tage that  the  courts  in  "  interpreting  "  the  constitution  often  actually 
exercise  large  powers  of  amendment.  The  expam^ojLflLthe  United 
States  Constitution  by  the  Supreme  Court  under  the  doctrine  of 
"  implied  powers  "  is  familiar  to  all. 

"The  method  of  amendment  also  determines  the  ease  with  which 
the  constitution  keeps  pace  with  changing  conditions.  If  the  con- 
stitution may  be  amended  easily,  by  a  method  that  enables  the 
political  sovereign  to  express  its  will,  there  will  be  no  discrepancy 
between  actual  conditions  and  legal  organization.  The  chief  dan- 
ger will  be  that  of  instability,  since  the  fundamental  form  of  the 
state  may  be  changed  by  temporary  gusts  of  popular  opinion.  If 
the  constitution  is  difficult  to  change,  or  if  amendment  follows  a 
method  that  does  not  enable  the  political  sovereign  to  express  its 
will,  one  of  two  things  will  probably  occur.  Either,  as  conditions 
changfej^d  large  number  of  extra-legal  institutions,  supported  by 
public  opinion,  will  develop,  practically  amending  the  constitution  ; 
or,  in  the  absence  of  this  method  of  amendment;' there  will  be 
danger  of  a  revolution  that  will  legally  distribute  sovereign  powers 
in  accord  with  actual  political  conditions. 

From  what  has  been  said  two  conclusions  may  be  drawn : 


200         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

1 .  That,  for  the  sake  of  stability  and  as  a  guarantee  of  individ- 
ual liberty,  certain  fundamental  principles  should  not  be  modified 
by  the  usual  procedure  of  the  ordinary  government.    Among  these 
may  be  mentioned  : 1 

(a)  Mode  of  selection  and  dismissal  of  the  officials  forming  the 
fundamental  framework  of  government,  such  as  members  of  the 
legislature,  chief  executive  officers,  and  judges. 

(b)  Distribution  of  functions  among  the  various  organs  of  gov- 
ernment, such  as  the  relation  of  legislature  to  executive  or  of 
central  to  local  organs. 

(c)  Form  of  procedure  in  general  organs  of  government,  such 
as  the  legal  method  by  which  a  law  may  be  created. 

(d)  Limitation  on  the  means  that  an  organ  of  government  may 
use,  even  in  attaining  legitimate  ends,  such  as  a  prohibition  against 
ex  post  facto  laws  or  against  laws  impairing  obligation  of  contract. 

(e)  Limitations  on  governmental  interference  in  sphere  of  in- 
dividual liberty,  such  as  guarantee  of  freedom  of  religion,  equality 
before  the  law,  etc. 

2.  That  some  method  of  constitutional  amendment  should  be 
provided  by  which  the  legal  organization  of  the  state  may  be 
made  to  correspond  with  existing  political  conditions.    The  actual 
methods  by  which  modern  states  legally  amend  their  constitutions 
may  be  classified  as  follows  : 

(a)  Ordinary  legislation,  as  in  the  case  of  England  or  Italy. 

(b)  Special  procedure  or   special   organs  of   government.    In 
France  the  two  houses  of  the  legislature  in  joint  session  may,  by 
ordinary  majority  vote,  change  constitutional  laws.    In  Germany 
the  constitution  may  be  amended  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the 
lawmaking  bodies  or  by  a  majority  of  the  qualified  voters  in 
a  popular  referendum.    In  Spain  a  special  parliament  is  elected 
on  the  issue  of  the  proposed  amendment.    In  the  United  States, 
amendments  may  be  proposed  by  two  thirds  of  both  houses  of 
Congress  or,   at  the  request  of  the   legislatures   of  two  thirds 
of  the  commonwealths,  by  a  convention  called  by  Congress  for 
that  purpose,  and  must  be  ratified  by  the  legislatures  in  three 
fourths  of  the  commonwealths  or  by  conventions  in  three  fourths 

1  Sidgwick,  Elements  of  Politics,  p.  540. 


CONSTITUTIONS  2OI 

of  the  commonwealths,  Congress  having  the  right  to  determine 
the  mode  of  ratification. 

(c)  Popular  referendum.  The  essence  of  this  method  is  that  an 
amendment,  proposed  either  by  the  legislature  or  by  a  petition 
signed  by  a  certain  number  of  citizens,  must  be  submitted  to  the 
people  and  ratified  by  a  majority  vote.  In  Switzerland  arid  Aus- 
tralia, where  this  method  is  in  use,  the  consent  of  a  majority  of 
the  commonwealths,  as  well  as  of  a  majority  of  votes  cast,  is  re- 
quired. In  the  United  States  commonwealths  proposed  constitu- 
tions are  usually  referred  to  popular  vote  for  ratification.  This 
method  of  constitution-creating  by  popular  vote  is  a  step  in  the 
separation  of  state  and  government,  since  it  recognizes  that  the 
people  and  not  the  government  should  create  constitutional  law. 
There  is,  of  course,  the  accompanying  danger  that  the  hands  of 
government  may  be  tied  by  detailed  constitutional  provisions. 

Several  queries  regarding  constitutional  amendment  may  arise  : 1 

1 .  In  case  a  constitution  makes  no  provision  for  its  own  amendr 
ment.    In  this  event  either  the  government  by  ordinary  legislation, 
as  is  the  case  in  Italy,  whose  written  constitution  makes  no  pro- 
vision for  amendment,  or  the  extra-legal  authority  that  originally 
created  the  constitution,  may  amend  it. 

2.  In  case  a  constitution  forbids  its  own  amendment.    This  pro- 
hibition would  be  binding  on  all  organs  of  government  created  by 
the  constitution,  but  not  on  the  extra-legal  authority  that  originally 
created  the  constitution.    Such  change,  however,  would  be  revolu- 
tionary, and,  if  acceded  to,  could  be  legalized  only  as  the  act  of 
a  new  sovereign. 

3 .  In  case  the  constitution  provides  a  legal  method  of  amend- 
ment.   In  this  case  a  strict  political  science  would  hold  that  that 
particular  method  must  be  followed.    Any  other,  no  matter  by  how 
large  a  majority,  would  be  a  revolution.    The  state's  will  can  be 
expressed  only  in  the  form  of  law  ;  an  illegal  act  is  never  the  act 
of  the  state.    There  are,  however,  many  constitutional  lawyers  who 
hold  that  the  original  method  by  which  a  constitution  was  created 
may  legally  be  put  into  operation  to  amend  it,  even  though  the 
constitution  makes  no  specific  provision  for  that  mode  of  procedure. 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  pp.  214-219. 


202         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

In  conclusion  it  should  be  emphasized  that  constitutions  grow, 
instead  of  being  made,  and  that  no  constitution  can  be  regarded 
as  final  or  unchanging.  Unwritten  constitutions  are  constantly 
modified  as  the  result  of  new  conditions  and  new  political  ideals ; 
written^constitutions  are^ianged  by'/usage,  b)?/judicial  interpreta- 
tion orjconstruction,  ancwfey  formal  amendment.  In  states  whose 
civilization  is  long-established,  reverence  for  tradition  leads  to 
constitutional  development  by  usage  to  a  greater  degree  than  is 
the  case  in  newer  societies,  where  constitutions  are  elaborate  in 
detail  and  frequently  revised.  Judicial  interpretation  in  determin- 
ing the  true  meaning  and  intention  of  the  constitution,  and  judicial 
construction  in  applying  the  constitution  to  contingencies  not 
provided  for,  are  important  means  of  growth,  especially  in  the 
United  States.  Expansion  by  formal  amendment  is,  of  course, 
the  usual  and  most  prolific  source  of  change,  no  modern  consti- 
tution being  considered  complete  unless  provision  is  made  for  a 
legal  method  of  alteration. 


PART  II 

THE  ORGANIZATION  OF 
GOVERNMENT 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XVI 

REFERENCES 
>     REQUISITES  OF  A  DEMOCRACY 

1.  CIVIL  LIBERTY 

2.  POLITICAL  LIBERTY 

a.  Extent  of  the  electorate 

b.  Control  exercised  by  electorate  over  government 

c.  Direct  popular  government 

EXTENT  OF  THE  ELECTORATE 

1.  AGE 

2.  SEX 

3.  CITIZENSHIP  AND  RESIDENCE 

4.  PROPERTY 

5.  MENTAL  AND  MORAL  QUALIFICATIONS 

CONTROL  OF  ELECTORATE  OVER  GOVERNMENT 

1.  REPRESENTATION 

2.  ELECTION 

3.  LOCAL  SELF-GOVERNMENT      \J* 

4.  POLITICAL  PARTIES 

5.  PUBLIC  OPINION 

(i>  INITIATIVE  AND  REFERENDUM 
MINORITY  REPRESENTATION 

1.  DISTRICT  TICKET 

2.  LIMITED  VOTING 

3.  CUMULATIVE  VOTING 

4.  PROPORTIONAL  REPRESENTATION 

5.  REPRESENTATION  BASED  ON  WEALTH 

' 


204 


CHAPTER  XVI 
THE  ELECTORATE 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  pp.  198-236 

BRYCE,  J.  The  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  II,  Part  IV 

CLEVELAND,  F.  A.  Growth  of  Democracy,  chaps,  ii-x. 

COMMONS,  J.  R.  Proportional  Representation 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  chap,  x 

DEPLOIGE,  S.  The  Referendum  in  Switzerland 

FREEMAN,  E.  A.  Comparative  Politics,  chap,  v 

GIDDINGS,  F.  H.  Democracy  and  Empire,  chaps,  xii,  xv 

HART,  A.  B.  Actual  Government,  chap,  iv 

HART,  A.  B.  Practical  Essays,  No.  II 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  Governments  and  Parties,  Vol.  II,  chap,  xii 

McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  Part  VII 

OBERHOLTZER,  E.  P.  The  Referendum  in  America 

SCHOULER,  J.  Constitutional  Studies,  Part  III,  chap,  iv 

STANTON,  E.  C.  History  of  Woman  Suffrage 

VINCENT,  J.  M.  Government  in  Switzerland,  chaps,  iv,  v,  xiv 

WALPOLE,  S.  The  Electorate  and  the  Legislature 

90.  Requisites  of  a  democracy.  The  strength  and  stability  of 
modern  states  are  usually  attributed  to  the  fact  that  they  are  demo- 
cratic. A  comparative  study  of  their  governments  should  there- 
fore be  preceded  by  a  more  careful  analysis  of  this  term.  As 
already  indicated,1  it  includes  two  concepts  : 

^i  I.  Civil  liberty,  or  exemption  within  a  certain  sphere  from 
interference  on  the  part  of  individual  or  government. 

^i  2.  Political  liberty,  or  the  right  to  share  in  exercising  the  author- 
ity of  the  state.  Accordingly,  a  state  is  democratic  when,  from 
the  standpoint  of  the  former,  all  its  citizens  are  guaranteed  an 
equal  amount  of  civil  liberty,  or,  as  usually  stated,  are  equal  before 
the  law ;  and,  from  the  standpoint  of  the  latter,  when  a  large  pro- 
portion of  its  citizens  take  some  part  in  legally  expressing  the 
state's  will. 

1  See  Chapter  IX. 
205 


206          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

A  state  in  which  all  are  equally  exempt  from  certain  interfer- 
ence, and  all  equally  share  in  exercising  such  authority  as  exists, 
would  be  a  perfect  democracy.  Such  a  condition  is,  in  practice, 
impossible.  The  actual  political  authority  exerted  by  the  mass  of 
citizens  is  determined  by  : 

1 .  The  extent  of  the  electorate.    That  is,  the  proportion  of  the 
entire  citizen  body  that  are  "active  citizens,"  or  the  number  that 
may,  at  any  time  or  in  any  way,  legally  exercise  governing  authority. 

2.  The  control  exercised  by  the  electorate  over  the  other  organs 
of  government.    If  the  electorate  exercises  only  small  powers,  and 
at  irregular  or  infrequent  intervals,  real  authority  is  in  the  hands 
of  the  ordinary  government,  and  the  extent  of  the  electorate  is 
only  an  apparent  test  of  democracy.    Only  when  its  control  over 
the  entire  government  is  extensive  and  constant  is  the  electorate 
an  important  governmental  factor. 

Hence,  in  a  pure  democracy,  the  electorate  would  coincide  with 
the  entire  citizen  body  and  would  directly  exercise  all  governmental 
authority.  But  no  state  finds  it  expedient  to  widen  its  electorate 
beyond  a  fractional  part  of  its  entire  population,  and  in  no  modern 
state  could  even  this  narrowed  electorate  exercise  all  governing 
powers.  The  degree  of  democracy  will  depend,  then,  upon  the 
limitations  placed  by  a  state  on  its  electorate,  and  upon  the  rela- 
tions existing  between  the  electorate  and  the  ordinary  organs  of 
government.  Besides,  since  unanimous  consent  among  a  large 
number  of  persons  is  unlikely,  and  some  form  of  majority  must 
prevail,  the  question  of  dealing  with  the  minority  remains,  all 
states  having  found  it  expedient  to  devise  means  of  protecting 
this  body  and  of  giving  it  a  legal  method  of  expressing  its  will. 
Accordingly,  the  limitations  placed  by  states  upon  their  electorates ; 
the  authority  exercised  by  electorates  indirectly,  by  means  of  their 
control  over  the  ordinary  organs  of  government ;  the  degree  in 
which  the  electorate  exercises  authority  directly,  without  the  inter- 
mediate use  of  other  governmental  organs ;  and  the  method  of 
representing  and  protecting  the  minority,  —  will  form  the  subdivi- 
sions of  this  chapter. 

91.  Extent  of  the  electorate.  The  widening  of  the  electorate 
is  one  of  the  most  characteristic  features  of  recent  political 


THE  ELECTORATE  207 

development.  States  have  always  made  a  distinction  between  citi- 
zens and  noncitizens,  based  mainly  in  ancient  times  on  common 
blood,  in  the  Middle  Ages  on  personal  allegiance,  and  more  recently 
on  territorial  sovereignty.  Within  this 'citizen  class,  all  of  whom 
owe  allegiance  to  the  state  and  may  claim  its  protection,  a  further 
division  has  been  made  into  those  who  have  not,  and  those  who 
have,  the  right  to  share  in  expressing  the  state's  will.  This  latter 
class  has  always  been  limited  to  a  comparatively  small  part  of  the 
total  citizen  body.  In  the  city  states  of  Greece  and  in  the  Roman 
republic  a  fair  proportion  of  the  population  had,  under  certain 
restrictions,  a  share  in  governmental  authority.  However,  Rome's 
expansion  and  the  establishment  of  the  Empire  destroyed  this 
development,  and  it  was  not  until  the  formation  of  a  national  state 
in  England  that  the  people  again  took  part  in  government.  There, 
according  to  Anglo-Saxon  customs,  the  local  units  were  practically 
independent ;  the  freemen  or  warriors  managed  tneir  own  affairs, 
and  in  each  township  chose  a  reeve  and  four  men  to  represent 
them  at  the  general  meeting  of  the  shire.  With  the  coming  of 
feudalism  into  England,  basing  authority  on  the  ownership  of 
land,  the  right  to  vote  was  limited  to  landholders ;  and,  after  the 
decline  of  feudalism,  this  survived  in  a  considerable  property 
qualification.  Religious  disputes  following  the  Reformation  added 
religious  qualifications. 

The  doctrines  of  natural  rights,  equality  of  man,  and  popular 
sovereignty,  which  were  prevalent  in  the  philosophic  theories  of 
the  eighteenth  century,  manifested  themselves  in  a  demand  for 
universal  manhood  suffrage,  and  in  the  French  Revolution  these 
doctrines  were  put  into  practice.  In  the  United  States,  where 
English  political  methods  had  been  established  without  the  back- 
ground of  feudal  institutions,  a  comparatively  extensive  suffrage 
was  further  widened  as  a  result  of  the  same  general  theories. 
Even  in  England  the  practical  injustice  resulting  from  the  re- 
stricted and  unevenly  distributed  franchise  led  to  the  Reform 
Acts  of  1832  and  following  years.  Other  important  states,  affected 
by  the  general  democratic  tendency  of  the  last  century,  have 
established  a  more  or  less  extended  electorate,  and  agitation  for 
a  wider  and  more  .equal  suffrage  still  exists. 


208          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

At  present  electorates  include  a  fractional  part  of  the  popula- 
tion, reaching  as  high  as  three  fifths  in  the  more  liberal  states  ; 
and  in  several  states,  such  as  New  Zealand,  where  adult  suffrage 
is  permitted,  almost  one  half  the  population  are  voters.  Remain- 
ing limitations,  some  being  survivals  of  earlier  restrictions,  others 
being  the  result  of  political  expediency,  may  be  summarized 
as  follows : 

i.  Age.  All  states  agree  that  certain  maturity  is  a  requisite  to 
the  political  judgment  needed  in  voting.  Hence  a  minimum  age 
limit  to  the  exercise  of  suffrage  is  universal.  The  United  States, 
France,  and  England  exclude  persons  under  twenty-one  years  of 
age  (England  requires  thirty  years  for  women) ;  Germany  and  Swit- 
zerland consider  twenty  years  sufficient.  This  qualification  alone 
removes  from  the  electorate  almost  half  the  entire  population. 
""2.  Sex.  Political  authority  in  its  origin  was  closely  connected 
with  military  power.  In  Greece  and  Rome,  and  among  the  Teu- 
tons, the  freemen  in  arms  formed  the  earliest  electorate.  When 
modern  'states  arose,  women  were  legally  and  economically  depend- 
ent ;  and,  while  in  some  states,  through  descent,  women  might 
occupy  the  throne,  the  idea  that  women  as  a  class  should  share 
with  men  in  government  did  not  exist.  In  fact,  except  for  the 
philosophical  theory  of  "  universal  suffrage,"  held  by  a  small 
minority  of  extreme  radicals  at  the  time  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, it  was  not  until  the  latter  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  that 
woman  suffrage  was  seriously  urged.  Even  to-day,  in  most  states, 
it  has  made  little  progress.  In  New  Zealand  and  Australia  women 
are  granted  full  suffrage ;  in  the  United  States  a  number  of  com- 
monwealths granted  equal  suffrage  rights  to  women  and  men, 
and  a  number  of  commonwealths  allowed  women  to  vote  in  local 
elections,  particularly  on  questions  concerning  the  public  schools. 
By  the  Nineteenth  Amendment  to  the  federal  constitution,  ratified 
in  1920,  full  suffrage  rights  were  extended  to  women.  England, 
in  1918,  granted  suffrage  to  women,  retaining,  however,  certain 
limitations  as  to  property  and  requiring  greater  age  for  women 
than  for  men.  The  recent  German  constitution  confers  full  suffrage 
rights  on  women.  Italy  for  a  number  of  years  has  allowed  widows 
owning  property  to  vote  in  national  elections.  Without  entering 


THE  ELECTORATE 


209 


into  the  merits  of  the  arguments  for  and  against  woman  suffrage, 
one  may  note  that  the  movement  has  gained  ground,  chiefly  in 
newer  communities  where  women  are  outnumbered  by  men.  At  the 
same  time  experience  shows  that  the  number  of  women  exercising 
such  suffrage  rights  as  they  now  possess  is  comparatively  small. 

3.  Citizenship.  At  the  present  time,  when  movement  of  pop- 
ulation from  state  to  state  is  common,  citizenship  becomes  an 
important  and  complicated  problem.  Most  states  require  either 
original  or  naturalized  citizenship  as  a  qualification  for  suffrage. 
Several  United  States  commonwealths  allow  aliens  to  vote  after 
having  declared  their  intention  to  become  citizens.  An  allied 
requisite  is  residence.  In  the  United  States,  where  population  is 
especially  mobile,  a  certain  period  of  residence,  ranging  from 
thirty  days  in  some  election  districts  to  two  years  in  some  com- 
monwealths, is  demanded ;  and  a  person  may  legally  vote  only  in 
the  district  containing  his  residence.  In  England  a  man  possess- 
ing certain  property  qualifications  may  vote  in  one  district  in 
addition  to  that  in  which  he  resides.  Some  form  of  registration 
to  prevent  fraud  in  voting  is  in  practice  in  all  states. 

Peculiar  conditions  of  citizenship  and  suffrage  exist  in  the 
United  States.  Naturalization  is  not  open  to  Mongolians  or  to 
members  of  Indian  tribes  living  on  the  reservations,  and  three  com- 
monwealths1 exclude  Mongolians  from  the  electorate,  even  when 
natural-born  citizens.  In  spite  of  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  negro 
suffrage  is  practically  prevented  in  most  of  the  southern  common- 
wealths by  the  nature  and  administration  of  their  suffrage  laws. 
^4.  Property.  Since  modern  suffrage  originated  during  the 
feudal  period,  its  exercise  was  for  a  long  time  limited  to  property 
holders.  An  early  English  statute  required  a  freehold  worth  forty 
shillings  a  year  as  a  requisite  for  voting,  and  for  centuries  the 
possession  of  real  estate  or  the  payment  of  taxes  was  necessary. 
According  to  the  current  theory,  voting  was  the  accompanying 
right  of  property,  not  of  citizenship,  since  property  owners  alone 
had  a  permanent  share  and  interest  in  the  community.  While 
this  theory,  formerly  universal,  has  largely  disappeared,  certain  of 
its  elements  survive.  A  small  poll  tax  remains  as  a  qualification 

1  California,  Oregon,  Nevada. 


210          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

in  several  United  States  commonwealths  ;  in  England  certain  re- 
strictions as  to  the  value  of  premises  owned,  leased,  or  occupied 
still  remain ;  and  in  Prussia  the  proportionate  power  exercised  by 
voters  depends  upon  the  taxes  they  pay.  While  paupers  dependent 
on  the  state  are  usually  excluded  from  the  electorate,  property 
qualifications  in  general  are  being  abolished. 

5.  Mental  and  moral  qualifications.  Religious  qualifications  for 
voting  have  practically  disappeared,  although  the  constitutions  of 
several  United  States  commonwealths  provide  that  no  person  shall 
vote  who  does  not  believe  in  a  God.  Criminals  in  confinement, 
idiots,  and  lunatics  are  invariably  excluded,  and  frequently  those 
who  have  been  convicted  of  crime  are  temporarily  or  permanently 
disqualified.  Recently,  educational  tests,  requiring  ability  to  read 
and  write,  have  been  adopted.  In  some  of  the  United  States 
commonwealths  this  is  a  genuine  requirement ;  in  others  it  is 
administered  chiefly  to  disfranchise  the  negro. 

In  addition  there  are,  in  certain  states,  exceptional  qualifications. 
For  example,  in  England,  according  to  ancient  unrepealed  laws, 
graduates  of  the  universities  or  liverymen  in  the  London  city  com- 
panies are  qualified  voters,  while  certain  clergymen,  sheriffs,  and 
other  officials  are  disqualified  as  parliamentary  electors.  In  many 
states  citizens  on  actual  military  duty  lose  their  votes.  Besides, 
the  full  strength  of  the  electorate  is  never  actually  exercised, 
sickness,  absence  from  home,  and  deliberate  or  thoughtless  failure 
to  vote  reducing  the  total.  Usually  about  seventy-five  or  eighty 
per  cent  of  the  possible  votes  are  cast,  but  in  local  elections  or  in 
referendums  in  which  there  is  little  general  interest  the  exercise 
of  the  suffrage  falls  much  lower. 

Qualifications  for  suffrage  are  sometimes  applied  to  the  entire 
population  of  the  state  by  a  single  law,  as  in  the  constitution  of  the 
German  republic,1  or  in  the  law  of  July  7,  1874,  in  France.  In 
England  the  suffrage  has  been  established  by  a  series  of  laws, 
each  of  which  extended  and  partially  repealed  previous  statutes. 
Of  these  the  Reform  Acts  of  1832  and  1867  and  the  Repre- 
sentation of  the  People  Act  of  1884  were  the  most  important.  In 
the  United  States,  except  for  the  Fifteenth  Amendment,  providing 

1  Article  XXII. 


THE  ELECTORATE  211 

that  the  right  of  citizens  to  vote  shall  not  be  denied  on  account  of 
"  race,  color,  or  previous  condition  of  servitude,"  and  the  Nine* 
teenth  Amendment,  extending  full  and  equal  suffrage  rights  to 
women,  qualifications  of  suffrage  are  left  to  the  separate  common- 
wealths, the  Constitution  1  providing  that  for  federal  suffrage  the 
voters  "  in  each  State  shall  have  the  Qualifications  requisite  for 
Electors  of  the  most  numerous  Branch  of  the  State  Legislature." 

92.  Control  of  electorate  over  government.  Having,  by  various 
qualifications,  established  the  electorate  within  their  entire  citizen 
body,  modern  states  further  differ  in  the  degree  of  authority  that 
this  electorate  exercises  in  government.  In  states  whose  constitu- 
tions may  be  modified  only  by  popular  consent,  the  electorate  often 
exercises  a  negative  control  in  excluding  the  ordinary  government 
from  a  certain  sphere  of  action.  Long  before  men  dreamed  of 
sharing  in  government  they  were  interested  in  limiting  the  scope 
of  its  activities.  The  real  authority  of  the  electorate  will  be  deter- 
mined largely  by  the  method  in  which  the  ordinary  officials  of 
government  are  chosen,  and  by  the  control  which  the  electorate 
exerts  over  them,  either  in  influencing  or  in  checking  their  action. 
Even  in  ancient  times  the  concept  of  popular  sovereignty  was 
grasped,  but  it  was  put  into  practice  only  in  direct  assemblies  of 
the  entire  electorate.  The  Greek  Ecclesia  was  a  confused  mass  of 
citizens  in  which  every  one  had  the  right  to  speak,  and  the  ma- 
jority controlled.  In  more  conservative  Rome  the  popular  assembly 
was  divided  into  classes  and  was  directed  by  the  magistrates. 

As  soon  as  the  area  and  population  of  a  state  exceed  a  compara- 
tively small  limit,  it  becomes  increasingly  difficult  for  all  citizens 
to  exercise  direct  political  power.  Popular  assemblies  either  are 
attended  by  only  a  minority  of  those  qualified,  or  become  too  un- 
wieldy for  actual  usefulness,  incapable  of  serious  deliberation  or  of 
dealing  with  complicated  problems.  Modern  democracies  have  met 
this  difficulty  by  selecting  smaller  groups,  representative  of  the 
whole,  to  create  law,  and  by  choosing  officials  to  administer  it. 
Representation  and  election  are  thus  two  means  by  which  the 
electorate  keeps  in  touch  with  the  other  organs  of  government. 
These  bonds  are  further  strengthened  by  the  principle  of  local 

1  Article  I,  section  2. 


212          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

self-government,  according  to  which  certain  affairs  are  left  in  the 
hands  of  smaller  units,  allowing,  in  those  areas,  a  more  intimate 
connection  between  electorate  and  government  than  would  be 
possible  in  the  state  as  a  whole. 

The  control  of  the  electorate  over  lawmaking  representatives  is 
narrowed  in  many  states  by  the  fact  that  heredity,  appointment, 
and  indirect  election  remove  part  of  the  legislatures  from  their 
influence.  Besides,  in  most  lawmaking  bodies,  representatives 
once  chosen  are  permitted  to  exercise  their  own  judgment  on  ques- 
tions at  issue,  and  are  under  no  legal  compulsion  to  express  the 
wishes  of  their  constituents.  Of  course,  in  all  elective  offices  the 
length  of  term  affects  the  power  of  the  electorate.  Frequent  elec- 
tions allow  opportunity  to  indicate  approval  or  disapproval  of  a 
certain  line  of  policy,  and  desire  for  reelection  leads  many  repre- 
sentatives to  follow  the  wishes  of  those  on  whom  that  reelection 
depends.  A  peculiar  authority  of  the  electorate  over  elected  offi- 
cials has  recently  been  tried  in  several  American  cities.  By  the 
"  recall "  a  certain  number  of  voters,  by  petition,  may  demand  a 
popular  vote  as  to  whether  or  not  a  certain  elected  official  shall 
remain  in  office.  In  this  way  the  electorate  may  remove,  as  well 
as  choose,  its  representatives. 

In  addition  to  the  pressure  of  public  opinion,  which,  by  means 
of  public  meetings,  petitions,  and  the  press,  may  be  brought  to 
bear  on  governmental  officials,  the  electorate  in  modern  states 
exerts  a  powerful  influence  by  means  of  political  parties.  These 
voluntary  associations  of  voters,  aiming  to  control  all  the  organs  of 
government,  and  establishing  behind  the  government  a  machinery 
of  nominations,  conventions,  and  committees,  determine_-the-jreal 
policy  of  the  state,  and  give  to  the  electorate  a  most  effective  way 
of  making  the  government  constantly  and  promptly  responsive  to 
its  will.  On  the  other  hand,  if  party  machinery  falls  under  the 
control  of  a  few  men,  the  electorate  finds  itself  less  powerful  than 
ever,  for  the  legal  irresponsibility  of  party  "  bosses  "  makes  them 
correspondingly  difficult  to  attack  or  remove.  As  political  parties 
become  a  legal  part  of  the  government  and  are  made  responsible 
to  the  wishes  of  the  electorate,  the  authority  of  the  latter  over 
government  will  correspondingly  increase. 


THE  ELECTORATE  213 

93.  Initiative  and  referendum.  In  addition  to  the  influence 
indirectly  exercised  by  the  electorate  in  its  control  over  the  ordinary 
government,  a  direct  share  in  governing  has  been  retained  by  the 
electorate  in  some  states  and  established  in  others.  Not  only  does 
the  electorate,  by  means  of  jury  service,  exercise  direct  judicial 
powers  in  many  states,  but  it  also  takes  more  or  less  part  in  the 
actual  creation  of  law.  Direct  legislation  has  survived  in  Switzer- 
land, partly  because  of  the  small  size  of  the  units,  partly  because 
of  the  influence  of  Rousseau,  who  taught  that  direct  democracy 
alone  embodied  true  popular  sovereignty.  In  several  other  states 
direct  legislation  has  been  adopted  in  an  effort  to  extend  democ- 
racy and  to  remedy  some  of  the  evils  of  representative  bodies. 
Modern  methods  of  transportation  and  communication  have  re- 
moved many  of  those  hindrances  to  direct  democracy,  in  large 
areas,  that  necessitated  representation  ;  and  government  by  the 
mass  of  the  people,  at  least  in  a  limited  degree,  ^  again  possible. 
This  takes  the  form  of  : 

1.  The  initiative^  by  which  a  given  number  of  voters  may,  on 
petition,  require  the  legislature  to  pass  a  statute  of  a  designated 
kind  and  submit  it  to  popular  vote.   In  the  "  formulative  initiative  " 
a  certain  number  of  voters  may  actually  draw  up  a  bill  in  detail 
and  demand  a  vote  upon  it. 

2.  Xhe_reierendum,  in  which  a  proposed  law  or  constitutional 
amendment  is  submitted  to  popular  vote  and  becomes  law  if  rati- 
fied by  the  required  majority.    This  may  be  "  compulsory  "  for  all 
or  for  certain  kinds  of  laws ;  or  may  be  "  optional,"  if  called  for 
by  a  certain  number  of  voters. 

3.  The  plebiscite^  in  which  a  certain  question  is  submitted  to 
popular  vote,  the  decision,  while  having  no  binding  force,  being 
intended  as  a  guide  to  the  policy  of  the  government. 

While  constitutions  were  first  adopted  by  popular  vote  in  the 
United  States  and  France,  direct  legislation  by  the  electorate  has 
been  most  highly  developed  in  Switzerland.  Four  of  the  twenty- 
two  cantons  forming  the  Swiss  federation  retain  the  ancient  folk- 
moot,  or  Landesgemeinde,  in  which  all  the  voters  meet,  pass  laws, 
vote  taxes,  and  elect  officials.  In  practice,  however,  these  bodies 
are  becoming  so  large  that  debate  is  impossible,  and  business  is 


214         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

prepared  beforehand  by  the  cantonal  council,  and  accepted  or  re- 
jected by  the  people  without  amendment.  In  the  federal  government 
the  referendum  is  compulsory  for  all  constitutional  amendments ; 
and  optional,  at  the  request  of  thirty  thousand  citizens  or  the  leg- 
islatures of  eight  cantons,  for  laws  of  general  application.  Fifty 
thousand  citizens  may  demand  either  a  specific  or  a  general  revision 
of  the  federal  constitution,  but  there  is  no  federal  initiative  for 
ordinary  laws,  unless  they  be  put  in  the  form  of  constitutional 
amendment.  In  all  the  cantons  there  are  compulsory  referendums 
for  constitutional  changes  ;  and  in  all  except  conservative  Freiburg 
and  those  having  the  Landesgemeinde,  the  referendum  for  ordinary 
laws  of  a  general  nature  is  either  compulsory  or  optional,  the 
number  of  voters  required  to  demand  a  referendum  in  the  latter 
case  depending  upon  the  population  of  the  canton.  The  initiative 
may  be  used  for  constitutional  revision  in  all  but  one  of  the  can- 
tons, and  in  all  but  three,  to  enact  or  revise  ordinary  legislation. 
In  actual  practice  the  referendum  is  used  much  more  than  the 
initiative,  and  a  large  proportion  of  proposed  laws  are  rejected. 

In  the  United  States  the  electorate  exercises  direct  legislation 
in  the  New  England  "town  meetings,"  where  the  voters,  in  mass 
meeting,  elect  township  officials  and  decide  questions  of  local  con- 
cern. Almost  from  the  beginning  of  our  national  history  popular 
votes  have  been  taken  on  the  adoption  or  amendment  of  constitu- 
tions. No  national  referendum  exists  in  the  United  States,  but  in 
the  commonwealths  a  number  of  questions  are  referred  to  popular 
vote.  These  take  the  form  mainly  of  special  statutes,  affecting 
only  certain  localities,  such  as  city  charters ;  or  of  general  statutes, 
applying  to  local  governments,  such  as  local  indebtedness  or  local 
option  in  liquor  selling.  The  constitutions  of  some  commonwealths 
demand  that  certain  laws,  such  as  those  regarding  a  change  in  the 
location  of  the  capital  or  an  increase  in  the  state  debt,  be  sub- 
mitted to  popular  vote ;  and  statutes  of  general  scope  have  been 
voluntarily  submitted  to  the  people,  as  in  the  case  of  the  location 
of  public  buildings  or  the  extension  of  suffrage  to  women.  In 
cities  referendum  on  many  questions  of  importance  is  becoming 
common.  The  initiative  is  also  in  use  in  several  commonwealths 
and  in  a  number  of  local  areas,  although  in  most  cases  petition 


THE  ELECTORATE  215 

to  legislatures  is  the  method  relied  upon  to  accomplish  the  same 
purpose. 

Among  the  advantages  of  direct  legislation  may  be  noted  : 

1.  The  people  may  force  action  upon  apathetic  legislatures,  or 
may"  prevent  legislation  that  does  not  reflect  the  wishes  of  the 
community. 

2.  The  people  are  less  likely  than  the  legislature  to  be  im- 
properly influenced  or   to    hesitate    in    opposing   certain  special 
interests. 

3.  Public  sentiment  is  awakened  and  interest  in  government 
stimulated  if  voters  have  questions  of  importance  to  consider. 

4.  The  local  referendum  may  adapt  general  laws  to  the  needs 
of  particular  localities. 

Among  the  disadvantages  are  : 

1 .  Voters  take  little  interest  in  such  elections.    Because  of  their 
frequency  and  because  a  large  proportion  of  citizens  are  not  in- 
terested in  many  questions  submitted,  the  number  of  votes  cast 
is  usually  small. 

2.  The  referendum  destroys  the  sense  of  responsibility  of  legis- 
latures and  executives.    Unwise  laws  are  passed  in  the  expectation 
that  popular  vote  will  destroy  them,  and  the  advantages  of  having 
laws  framed  by  a  group  of  men  specially  selected  and  trained  is 
largely  lost. 

3.  It  is  almost  impossible  to  frame  complicated  statutes  con- 
cerning economic  or  social  questions  in  such  a  way  that  a  simple 
yes  or  no  vote  will  indicate  the  real  will  of  the  people. 

Present  indications  point  to  further  extension  of  direct  legisla- 
tion in  the  United  States.  The  idea  that  constitutional  changes 
must  be  submitted  to  popular  vote  is  deeply  fixed  in  political 
thought,  and  the  detailed  provisions  embodied  in  recently  adopted 
commonwealth  constitutions  show  a  growing  distrust  of  legisla- 
tures. At  the  same  time,  in  local  units,  particularly  in  cities,  there 
is  a  general  demand  that  all  questions  of  importance,  especially 
those  concerning  the  expenditure  of  money,  shall  be  submitted  to 
popular  vote.  Democracy  is  thus  being  extended  by  greater  con- 
trol on  the  part  of  the  electorate  over  government,  by  a  grow- 
ing amount  of  direct  legislation,  and  by  increased  responsibility 


2i6         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

and  legality  of  political  parties,  hitherto  the  chief  bond  between 
people  and  government. 

The  preceding  discussion  of  the  powers,  direct  and  indirect, 
exercised  by  the  electorate  in  modern  democratic  states  may  be 
summed  up  as  follows : l  The  electorate  has  become  practically  a 
fourth  department  of  government.  Standing  back  of  the  ordinary 
executive,  legislative,  and  judicial  organs,  it  exercises  political 
powers,  varying  in  different  states,  but  tending  to  become  more 
extensive  as  intelligence  and  political  ability  increase.  It  exercises 
executive  powers  in  electing  officers  of  administration,  lawmaking 
representatives,  and  judges ;  it  shares  in  legislation  through  the 
initiative  and  referendum ;  it  takes  part  in  judicial  decisions  by 
means  of  jury  service.  In  some  states  it  has  a  deciding  voice  in 
the  formulation  of  the  constitution,  thus  determining  the  funda- 
mental organization  of  the  state.  At  the  same  time  restrictions 
on  the  extent  of  the  electorate,  once  numerous,  are  being  removed, 
this  process  making  it  coincide  more  and  more  with  the  politically 
capable  population  of  the  state. 

94.  Minority  representation.  In  a  direct  democracy  it  is  con- 
ceivable that  the  wishes  of  a  minority,  consisting  of  almost  half 
the  entire  electorate,  might  be  completely  disregarded.  To  prevent 
this  possible  tyranny  of  the  majority,  a  number  of  devices  are  in 
use,  granting  to  minorities  more  or  less  share  in  authority. 

The  systems  of  federal  government  and  of  local  self-government 
are  favorable  to  minorities,  in  that  they  allow  local  communities  to 
adjust  government  to  their  own  needs,  and  avoid  the  possible  op- 
pression that  uniform  legislation  might  mean.  Besides,  in  dividing 
a  state  into  districts  and  subdistricts,  with  officials  and  represent- 
atives chosen  separately  by  each,  the  chance  that  a  minority  will 
control  some  places  is  much  greater  than  would  be  the  case  if  all 
officials  were  chosen  on  a  "  general  ticket."  In  all  states  national 
legislatures  are  elected  by  districts,  and  within  these  areas  smaller 
districts  usually  serve  as  the  bases  for  the  selection  of  local  officials. 
By  the  process  known  as  "gerrymandering"  the  authority  having 
the  right  to  redistribute  these  districts  often  arranges  them  in 
such  a  way  as  to  make  it  difficult  for  the  minority  to  control  any 

1  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  pp.  217-218. 


THE  ELECTORATE 


2I7 


of  them  ;  or,  by  combining  the  minority  voters  in  a  few  districts, 
give  them  fewer  representatives  than  their  strength  really  deserves. 
Because  of  unequal  growth  of  population  frequent  changes  in  the 
distribution  of  districts  is  necessary,  if,  as  is  usually  the  case, 
population  is  the  basis  of  representation. 

Within  the  districts,  even  when  honestly  and  equally  established, 
there  are  always  minorities  whose  votes,  cast  for  defeated  candi- 
dates, are  lost ;  and  various  schemes  of  minority  representation 
have  been  proposed,  and  in  some  cases  put  into  practice.  Some- 
times it  is  provided  by  law  that  certain  boards  or  commissions 
shall  contain  members  of  both  political  parties,  thus  guaranteeing 
minority  representation.  In  districts  where  more  than  one  candi- 
date is  to  be  elected,  the  plan  of  "  limited  voting,"  by  which  each 
voter  is  allowed  fewer  votes  than  there  are  places  to  be  filled,  results, 
unless  the  majority  party  is  strong  enough  to  divide  its  votes  and 
still  win,  in  the  election  of  some  minority  members.  From  1867 
to  1885  this  plan  was  tried  in  England,  voters  in  places  sending 
more  than  two  members  to  Parliament  being  each  allowed  one  vote 
less  than  the  number  of  members  to  be  chosen.  In  "  cumulative 
voting"  each  voter  has  as  many  votes  as  there  are  candidates  to 
be  elected,  and  may  distribute  them  as  he  likes.  In  this  way  a 
minority,  if  it  concentrates  its  votes  on  one  candidate,  has  a  good 
chance  to  secure  his  election.  This  method  is  in  use  in  Illinois, 
where  three  members  are  chosen  to  the  legislature  from  each  dis- 
trict, and  results  in  giving  the  minority  about  one  third  of  the 
members.  In  "  proportional  representation"  an  attempt  is  made 
to  represent  the  surplus  votes  that  successful  candidates  often  re- 
ceive. From  the  candidate  having  the  highest  number  of  votes 
all  above  the  majority  necessary  for  election  are  taken  away  and 
added  to  the  candidate  indicated  by  the  voters  as  their  second 
choice,  and  so  on  until  the  proper  number  are  elected.  Until  the 
entire  vote  is  calculated  it  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  tell  who  is 
elected. 

In  Prussia  a  form  of  minority  representation  aiming  to  guard 
the  interests  of  the  upper  classes  was  formerly  in  use.  Voters  were 
divided  into  three  classes,  not  numerically,  but  according  to  wealth, 
each  representing  one  third  of  the  taxable  property  of  the  district ; 


2l8          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

and  each  class  elected  one  third  of  the  representatives  or  officials 
to  which  the  district  was  entitled.  A  comparatively  small  number 
of  wealthy  men  composed  the  first  class  ;  a  considerable  number  of 
well-to-do,  the  second  ;  and  the  great  majority  of  citizens,  the  third. 
Hence  a  very  small  number  elected  one  third  of  the  officials,  and 
a  minority  usually  controlled  two  thirds.  In  Berlin  the  first  class 
contained  "  less  than  two  per  cent  of  the  voters,  the  second  class 
less  than  thirteen  per  cent,  and  the  third  eighty-six  per  cent."  1 
Naturally  the  lowest  class  was  discontented  and  largely  refrained 
from  voting.  In  Belgium  a  somewhat  similar  system  was  in  use 
until  1913,  citizens  having  certain  qualifications  as  to  age,  property, 
education,  etc.  being  given  either  one  or  two  supplementary  votes. 

In  England  and  America  plurality  is  usually  sufficient  for  election. 
Since  in  both  these  countries  there  are  only  two  strong  parties, 
hence  usually  two  leading  candidates,  this  convenient  method 
works  little  hardship,  although  the  successful  candidate  often  re- 
ceives little  more  than  one  third  of  the  total  vote.  In  Europe, 
where  party  groups  are  numerous,  absolute  majority  is  often 
required.  In  France,  if,  on  the  first  ballot,  no  one  receives  a  major- 
ity, another  vote  is  taken  two  weeks  later,  and  at  this  a  plurality 
is  sufficient  to  elect.  As  a  result  numerous  groups  show  their 
strength  on  the  first  ballot,  hoping  to  win  concessions  from  the 
leading  candidates  on  the  second.  In  Germany,  if  no  candidate 
receives  a  majority,  a  new  election  within  two  weeks  decides 
between  the  two  candidates  that  received  the  highest  number  of 
votes  at  the  first  election,  the  lot  deciding  in  case  of  a  tie. 

The  peculiar  arithmetical  system  by  which  presidential  electors 
are  distributed  in  the  United  States,  each  commonwealth  being 
entitled  to  as  many  as  it  has  senators  and  representatives  in  Con- 
gress, thus  giving  an  advantage  to  the  small  commonwealths  be- 
cause of  equal  representation  in  the  Senate  ;  and  the  custom  of 
voting  for  presidential  electors  on  a  general  ticket,  so  that,  no 
matter  how  small  the  majority,  the  entire  vote  of  a  commonwealth 
is  cast  for  one  candidate,  —  make  it  possible  for  a  president  to  be 
elected  who  receives  a  minority  of  the  total  popular  vote.  This 
has  actually  happened  several  times, 

1  Quoted  in  Wilson,  The  State,  p.  295. 


THE  ELECTORATE 


219 


A  modified  form  of  minority  representation  is  found  in  the 
attempt,  formerly  common,  to  represent  separately  the  important 
classes,  professions,  or  interests  within  the  state.  In  the  Middle 
Ages  the  three  estates  —  clergy,  nobility,  and  commons  —  re- 
ceived distinct  representation,  and  the  constitution  of  upper  houses 
in  some  European  states  still  shows  survivals  of  class  divisions. 
Landowners,  churchmen,  large  taxpayers,  representatives  of  army 
and  navy,  and  men  distinguished  in  science  or  art  are  found  in 
upper  houses,  and  are  chosen  for  the  purpose  of  representing 
interests  or  classes  rather  than  population  or  territorial  divisions. 
In  the  United  States  the  legal  profession  has  wielded  an  influence 
in  politics  out  of  all  proportion  to  its  numerical  strength. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XVII 

REFERENCES 

THE  ORDINARY  GOVERNMENT 

1.  THE  SEPARATION  OF  POWERS 

2.  THE  DIVISION  OF  POWERS 

THEORY  OF  THE  SEPARATION  OF  POWERS 
SEPARATION  OF  POWERS  IN  MODERN  STATES 

1.  IN  PARLIAMENTARY  GOVERNMENTS 

2.  IN  NONPARLIAMENTARY  GOVERNMENTS 

CRITICISM  OF  THE  SEPARATION  OF  POWERS 
!        DIVISION  OF  POWERS 

1.  UNITARY  AND  DUAL  GOVERNMENTS 

2.  RELATION  OF  CENTRAL  TO  LOCAL  ORGANS 

a.  Legislative  centralization  and  administrative  decentrali- 

zation 

b.  Legislative  decentralization  and  administrative  centrali- 

zation 

c.  Advantages  and  disadvantages  of  each 


220 


CHAPTER  XVII 
SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  pp.  236-253 

BAGEHOT,  W.  The  English  Constitution,  chap,  ii 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  VII,  chaps,  v-vii 

BONDY,  W.  The  Separation  of  Governmental  Powers.   Columbia  College  Studies, 

Vol.  V,  No.  2 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  pp.  127-146 
FEDERALIST,  THE.    Essays  xlvii-li 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  I,  chaps,  iii-vi 
GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Politics  and  Administration,  chaps,  i-v 
LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  Part  II,  chap,  i 
LOWELL,  A.  L.  Essays  on  Government,  No.  II 
McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  chaps,  ui,  iv 
MEDLEY,  D.  J.  English  Constitutional  History,  chap,  vi 
MONTESQUIEU,  C.  Esprit  des  Lois,  Bk.  XI,  chap,  vi 
SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chaps,  xix,  xx 
SMITH,  J.  A.  The  Spirit  of  American  Government,  chap,  vi 
WILSON,  W.  Congressional  Government,  chap,  i 
WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Part  III,  chap,  ix 

95.  The  ordinary  government.  In  its  broadest  sense  the  gov- 
ernment of  a  state  includes  the  entire  electorate  in  so  far  as  it 
chooses  representatives  and  officials  or  exercises  direct  legislation 
through  initiative/referendum,  or  plebiscite.  It  also  includes  special 
conventions  when  legally  assembled  for  constitution-amending  or 
other  purposes;  and,  in  actual  practice,  though' largely  unrecog- 
nized by  law,  political  parties,  with  their  caucuses,  committees, 
and  conventions,  form  important  factors  in  government.  However, 
all  of  these  are  infrequent  or  irregular  in  their  action,  and  may  be 
distinguished  from  the  ordinary  organs  of  government  that  are 
constantly  in  existence  and  that  wield  by  far  the  greater  part  of 
state  authority. 

These  organs,  whose  structure  and  powers  are  outlined  in  the 
constitution  of  the  state,  express  and  put  into  execution  the  state's 
will.  Because  of  the  extent  of  modern  states  in  area  and  population, 

221 


222          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

and  because  of  the  wide  range  of  interests  with  which  their  gov- 
ernments must  deal,  a  large  number  of  persons  are  included  in 
government,  and  considerable  distribution  of  power  is  necessary. 
The  bases  of  classification  that  best  serve  as  a  framework  for  a 
discussion  of  existing  governments  are  : 

1.  The  separation  of  powers.    According  to  the  nature  of  their 
functions,  organs  of  government  are  usually  classified  as  legis- 
lative, executive,  and  judicial.   Legislatures  are  concerned  in  the 
making  of  law ;  executive  officials,  in  the  carrying  out  of  law ; 
and  the  judiciary,  in  deciding  as  to  the  application  of  law  to  partic- 
ular cases.    While  in  theory  these  functions  seem  quite  separate, 
in  actual  practice  no  clear-cut  distinctions  are  possible.    Executive 
officials  must  exercise  wide  discretionary  powers  in  administerin 
law,  and  must  deal  with  questions  concerning  which  no  law  exists 
judges  in  their  decisions  often  create  new  law  as  well  as  admin- 
ister existing  law.  At  the  same  time  states  differ  widely  in  their 
attempts  to  separate  these  departments  or  to  subordinate  one  t(. 
another,  fundamental  differences  in  organization  resulting  from 
their  adjustment. 

2.  The  division  of  powers.    According  to  the  area  oyer  which 
organs  of  government  have  jurisdiction,  or  according  to  the  nature 
of  the  questions  with  which  they  deal,  a  division  into  central  and 
local  government  is  made ;  and  in  the  latter,  several  degrees  of 
subdivision,  such  as  colonial,  commonwealth,  district,  rural,  and 
city  units,  are  found.    Thus,  in  addition  to  a  separation  of  govern- 
ment into  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  departments,  a  cross 
classification  of  these   into  central  and  various    local  organs  is 
universal.    The  relation  that  local  governments  bear  to  the  central 
organization ;  and  the  adjustment  of  legislative,  executive,  and 
judicial  organs  within    each  division  and  among  the  divisions, 
become  important  questions.  For  purposes  of  comparison  a  survey 
of  existing  governments,  classified  on  the  basis  of  their  separation 
and  division  of  powers,  will  be  undertaken  in  succeeding  chapters. 
It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  government  of  each 
state  is  ultimately  a  unit,  the  sum  of  all  the  organs  included  in 
its  departments  and  divisions  forming  the  legal  organization  of 
the  state  and  exercising  its  sovereignty. 


SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS         223 

96.  Theory  of  the  separation  of  powers.  The  theory  of  the 
separation  of  powers  may  be  briefly  stated  as  follows.  The  func- 
tions of  government  are  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial.  These 
functions  should  be  performed  by  different  bodies  of  persons ; 
each  department  should  be  limited  to  its  own  sphere  of  action, 
and  within  that  sphere  should  be  independent  and  supreme. 
These  principles  were  the  logical  outcome  of  the  historic  process 
by  which  government  developed.  At  first  all  political  power  was 
concentrated  in  the  person  of  the  chief  or  king,  who  was  respon- 
sible to  no  one  for  his  actions,  and  who  was  limited  by  no  legal 
restraint.  The  evolution  of  the  state  was  accompanied  by  exten- 

ive  differentiation  in  government  and  by  increasing  political  con- 

iousness  of  the  people,  with  corresponding  participation  on  their 

irt  in  government.    In  this  process  the  authority  of  the  monarch 

vvas  distributed  among  various  officials,  and  the  people,  at  first 

aiming  to  limit  governing  power,  finally  controlled  it.  Accordingly 

o  was  natural  that  the  winning  of  democracy  should  be  accom- 
panied by  the  belief  that  concentration  of  authority  meant  tyranny, 
and  that  only  under  a  distribution  of  powers,  safeguarded  by  checks 
and  balances,  was  individual  liberty  possible. 

It  is  not  surprising,  then,  that  some  form  of  the  separation- 
of-powers  theory  usually  accompanied  democratic  development. 
Based  on  his  observations  of  Greek  city  states,  Aristotle,  referring 
to  the  departments  of  government,  said,1  "  the  first  of  these  is  the 
public  assembly ;  the  second,  the  officers  of  the  state  .  .  .  ;  the 
third,  the  judicial  department."  In  the  writings  of  Polybius,2  based 
on  his  study  of  the  Roman  republic,  the  excellence  of  its  organ- 
ization was  attributed  to  the  system  of  constitutional  checks  and 
balances  provided.  In  the  Byzantine  Empire  an  extensive  dis- 
tinction was  also  made  between  military  and  civil  organs  of  gov- 
ernment, and  this  separation  has  been  accepted  in  modern  states. 
The  establishment  of  the  Roman  Empire,  the  aristocratic  govern- 
ment of  feudalism,  and  the  rise  of-  national  states  under  absolute 
monarchs,  again  concentrating  authority,  crushed  these  principles  ; 
and  it  was  not  until,  as  absolute  monarchies  declined,  popular  sov- 
ereignty demanded  some  constructive  theory  for  its  support  that 

t  T> -,:.:_   uu   ^v   chap,  xiv.  2  History  of  Rome,  Bk.  VI. 


224          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  modern  doctrine  of  the  separation  of  powers  took  shape. 
Bodin  urged  that  the  prince  should  not  administer  justice  in 
person,  especially  when  deciding  crimes  against  himself,  and 
rulers  began  to  leave  to  independent  tribunals  the  ordinary  admin- 
istration of  justice.  Locke  and  Montesquieu  noted  the  differentia- 
tion of  governing  authority,  and  the  latter,1  basing  his  reasoning 
upon  what  he  considered  to  be  the  form  of  English  government, 
distinguished  three  powers  —  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  — 
and  urged  the  importance  of  intrusting  each  to  a  distinct  and 
independent  authority. 

While  the  separation  of  departments  which  Montesquieu  ex- 
tolled did  not  actually  exist  in  England  and  became  even  less 
distinct  as  time  went  on,  and  while  differentiation  of  powers  in 
continental  states  took  a  still  different  form,  the  general  principles 
of  the  theory  were  adopted  in  the  political  thought  of  the  day. 
They  were  incorporated  into  the  written  constitutions  then  being 
formed  and  have  become  political  axioms.  Blackstone,  in  his 
"  Commentaries '"  (1765),  states  that  the  union  of  the  powers  of 
making  and  enforcing  laws  in  the  same  man  or  body  of  men 
destroys  liberty.  In  France  the  Constituent  Assembly  (1789)  de- 
clared 2  that  a  country  in  which  the  separation  of  powers  is  not 
determined  does  not  have  a  constitution.  In  the  United  States, 
where,  in  colonial  times,  a  long  contest  between  governor  and 
assembly  had  emphasized  the  hostility  of  executive  and  legislature, 
the  doctrine  of  separation  of  departments  and  of  numerous  checks 
and  balances  was  especially  welcome.  In  all  states,  depending  upon 
their  historic  development,  their  existing  conditions,  and  their  im- 
itation of  other  states,  a  separation  of  departments,  more  or  less 
complete,  is  found. 

97.  Separation  of  powers  in  modern  states.  The  doctrine  that 
individual  liberty  can  be  secured  only  through  an  extensive  system 
of  checks  and  balances  was  an  article  of  political  faith  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  and  was  carried  to  its  greatest  extremes  in  the 
federal  and  commonwealth  constitutions  of  the  United  States. 
More  recently  this  theory  has  lost  much  of  its  former  credit, 

1  Esprit  des  Lois,  Bk.  XI,  chap.  vi. 

2  Declaration  des  droits  de  1'homme  et  du  citoyen,  Art.  16. 


SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS 


225 


though  it  still  lies  at  the  basis  of  many  political  organizations. 
While  subject  to  numerous  exceptions,  differing  in  different  states, 
the  policy  of  confining  organs  of  government  in  general  to  the 
exercise  of  those  powers  assigned  to  them  by  this  theory  has 
been  proved  wise  by  experience. 

In  modern  states  the  position  of  the  judiciary  is  probably  most 
distinct  and  independent.  Their  tenure  is  usually  sufficiently  per- 
manent to  remove  them  from  the  control  of  the  body  that  selects 
them,  whether  it  be  electorate,  legislature,  or  executive.  Their 
functions  are  carefully  limited  and  protected,  and  particular  effort 
is  made  to  keep  them  free  from  bias  or  extraneous  influence.  At 
the  same  time  this  separation  is  not  complete.  Except  in  the 
United  States,  where  the  Supreme  Court  is  established  by  the 
Constitution,  courts  may  be  created  or  destroyed  by  legislatures, 
and  the  influence,  direct  or  indirect,  of  those  who  select  the  judges 
remains.  Besides,  in  all  states,  legislatures  and  executive  officials 
exercise  functions  that  are  judicial  in  nature,  and  the  courts  share 
in  creating  and  executing  law.  Legislatures  not  only  create  the 
law  that  courts  apply,  but  in  deciding  upon  the  qualifications  of 
their  members  and  in  serving  as  courts  of  impeachment,  as 
in  France  and  the  United  States,  or  as  final  courts  of  appeal,  as  in 
England,  they  exercise  powers  properly  judicial.  The  executive,  in 
its  power  of  pardon  and  in  deciding  many  disputes  arising  in  the 
course  of  administration,  also  shares  in  judicial  authority.  Courts 
perform  executive  functions  in  their  right  to  repress  interruption 
or  prevent  interference  with  their  proceedings  ;  and  the  lower 
courts  in  the  United  States  and  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  Eng- 
land are  important  administrative  as  well  as  judicial  tribunals. 
Courts  exercise  legislative  functions  in  issuing  injunctions,  in  ex- 
tending or  restricting  law  by  interpretation,  and  in  applying  equity 
or  common  law.  In  the  United  States,  where  courts  may  declare 
laws  unconstitutional,  the  -judiciary  has  practically  a  veto  on 
legislation. 

The  doctrine  of  separation  of  powers,  in  so  far  as  it  concerns  the 
control  of  the  judiciary  over  executive  officials,  has  had  a  different 
application  in  Europe  from  that  obtaining  in  England  and  the 
United  States.  In  these  latter  states,  whose  development  has  been 


226          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

marked  by  long  contests  against  executive  power,  and  whose  strong 
individualism  has  rebelled  against  extensive  governmental  author- 
ity, officers  of  government,  acting  in  their  official  capacity,  are 
subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary  courts  almost  to  the 
same  degree  as  private  citizens  ;  and  their  individual  acts,  except 
when  of  a  political  or  contractual  nature,  may<  in  many  cases  be 
amended,  interpreted,  or  prevented  by  the  courts.  On  the  con- 
tinent, especially  in  France,  a  much  wider  scope  is  given  to  admin- 
istrative officials  ;  and  their  acts  are  reviewed  by  special  tribunals 
known  as  administrative  courts,  organized  quite  differently  from 
the  ordinary  courts  and  not  forming  part  of  the  regular  judicial 
system.  While  claiming  to  rest  on  the  principle  of  separation  of 
powers,  this  executive  independence  actually  results  in  consider- 
able limitation  on  civil  liberty,  since  arbitrary  acts  may  be  per- 
formed with  impunity  by  executive  officials,  no  way  of  bringing 
them  to  account  before  the  ordinary  courts  of  law  being  possible. 
The  most  important  application  of  the  doctrine  of  separation  of 
powers  is  in  the  relation  existing  between  legislature  and^executive 
in  modern  states^  As  already  indicated,1  governments  may  be 
classified  as  parliamentary  and  nonparliamentary.  In  the  former 
legislative  and  executive  powers  are  not  separated.  The  cabinet, 
as  a  committee  of  the  legislature,  directs  the  making  of  those  laws 
which,  as  heads  of  the  various  administrative  departments,  it  ex- 
ecutes. It  remains  in  office  only  as  long  as  it  is  supported  by  a 
majority  of  the  legislature,  resigning  when  that  support  is  lost. 
Hence  the  same  body  of  men  controls  both  legislation  and  ad- 
ministration, and  the  very  opposite  of  separation  of  powers  is  the 
case.  Even  in  Montesquieu's  time  this  process  of  concentrating 
governing  authority,  though  ,  recognized  by  law,  was  well  ad- 
vanced in  England,  and  has  siuce  been  adopted  in  France,  Italy, 
and  the  majority  of  European  states.  In  actual  operation  the  Eng- 
lish legislature  sets  bounds  to  its  control  over  executive  functions, 
leaving  the  executive  within  its  own  field  practically  independ- 
ent. In  France  the  legislature  exercises  its  powers  more  exten- 
sively, making  the  executive  almost  completely  dependent.  The 
only  experience  that  the  United  States  has  had  with  parliamentary 

1  See  section  80. 


SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS 


227 


government  was  during  the  Confederation  (1781-1789),  when 
executive  officers  and  courts  were  at  the  mercy  of  Congress. 

In  nonparliamentary  governments  the  executive,  in  its  origin 
and  tenure,  is  independent  of  the  legislature,  and  within  a  cer- 
tain sphere  exercises  functions  with  which  the  legislature  cannot 
interfere.  Such  is  the  general  system  in  the  United  States,  in 
Switzerland,  and  in  the  American  republics.  In  no  state,  how- 
ever, is  the  separation  complete.  The  law  that  the  executive 
carries  out  is,  of  course,  created  by  the  legislature,  and  control 
over  the  military  forces  gives  to  the  executive,  especially  in  time 
of  war,  large  authority  over  the  entire  government.  Besides,  each 
department  shares  in  functions  belonging  primarily  to  the  other. 
The  legislature,  by  its  share  in  the  appointing  power,  its  right 
of  impeachment,  and  its  control  over  taxation  and  appropriations, 
exercises  authority  mainly  administrative  in  nature.  The  executive, 
in  its  veto,  its  right  to  initiate  legislation,  either  directly  or  by 
recommendation,  and  its  power  of  issuing  ordinances,  independent 
of  or  supplementary  to  existing  laws,  shares  in  legislative  authority. 
In  the  United  States,  treaties  negotiated  by  the  executive  become 
valid  only  when  ratified  by  a  two-thirds  majority  in  the  Senate ; 
and  in  the  German  republic,  treaties  concluded  by  the  president 
require  the  consent  of  the  National  Assembly  if  they  relate  to 
subjects  within  national  jurisdiction. 

The  general  relation  of  the  departments  in  the  leading  modern 
states  may  be  summed  up  as  follows : 1  In  the  United  States  the 
executive  is  almost  entirely  independent  of  the  legislature,  but  is, 
in  many  cases,  subject  to  the  control  of  the  courts.  In  France 
the  executive  is  subject  to  the  control  of  the  legislature,  but  is 
almost  entirely  independent  of  tj^  courts.  In  Germany  the  execu- 
tive is  largely  dependent  upon,  the  legislature  and  may  be  im- 
peached before  the  highest  court.  In  England  the  executive  is 
subject  to  the  control  of  the  legislature  and,  in  many  cases,  also 
of  the  courts. 

98.  Criticism .  of  separation  of  powers.  The  general  doctrine 
of  the  separation  of  powers  contains  valuable  political  prin- 
ciples. In  government,  as  in  all  highly  developed  organizations, 

.        l  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  p.  37. 


228          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

differentiation  of  function  and  division  of  labor  are  essential.  Dif- 
ferent requisites  are  demanded  for  different  duties,  and  efficiency  is 
secured  by  specialization.  It  is  therefore  desirable  that  legislative, 
executive,  and  judicial  functions  should  in  general  be  exercised 
by  separate  organs,  and  that  within  these  further  subdivisions  be 
made.  All  states  agree  in  giving  to  the  judiciary  a  certain  hide-' 
pendence  in  tenure  and  in  action,  but  no  such  consensus  exists  as 
to  the  proper  relation  of  legislature  and  executive.  English  writers 
praise  the  harmony  in  government  and  the  prompt  response 
to  public  opinion  secured  by  the  cabinet  system,  while  American 
writers  emphasize  the  advantages  of  an  independent  executive. 
Their  relative  merits  depend  largely  upon  political  traditions  and 
existing  conditions  in  each  state. 

In  assuming  that  extensive  separation  of  powers  is  essential  to 
liberty,  and  that  each  department,  limited  to  its  own  functions, 
should  be  independent  of  other  organs  within  that  sphere,  the 
doctrine  breaks  down.  That  individual  liberty  is  possible  without 
separation  of  powers  the  present  government  of  England  suffi- 
ciently attests.  In  a  democratic  state  concentration  of  authority 
in  the  hands  of  the  organ  most  directly  representing  the  people 
may  secure  greater  liberty  than  divided  powers  granted  to  inde- 
pendent and  irresponsible  organs.  In  fact,  a  pure  democracy  pre- 
supposes complete  concentration  of  all  authority  in  the  hands  of 
the  electorate,  and*  checks  and  balances  usually  secure  a  consider- 
able degree  of  minority  control.  Any  attempt  at  complete  separa- 
tion of  functions  must  fail.  As  the  preceding  section  shows,  each 
organ  participates  in  the  duties  of  the  others,  the  same  organ  at 
different  times  exercising  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  powers. 
Beyond  a  certain  degree  separation  of  powers  leads  to  troublesome 
deadlocks,  and  complete  separation  is  impossible,  not  merely  in 
practical  application,  but  even  in  theory. 

An  examination  of  existing  governments,  taking  into  consider- 
ation their  actual  working  and  those  institutions  that  have  grown 
up  outside  the  formal  constitution  of  the  state,  shows  their  essen- 
tial similarity.  The  government  of  each  state  is  a  unit,  being  in 
its  entirety  the  legal  organization  of  the  state.  Its  functions  are 
twofold.  It  must  formulate  the  state's  will  and  put  that  will  ; 


SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS         229 

execution.  All  governments,  regardless  of  their  form,  are  limited 
to  these  two  functions, —  the  judiciary,  instead  of  being  a  separate 
department,  sharing  sometimes  in  creating,  sometimes  in  enforc- 
ing law.  However  distinct  the  functions  of  government  may  be, 
no  such  clear  separation  may  be  made  among  the  organs  exer- 
cising these  functions.  More  or  less  differentiated  organs  develop, 
especially  in  democratic  states,  and  secondary  functions,  delegated 
to  somewhat  independent  organs,  make  government  increasingly 
complex.  For  example,  the  will  of  the  state  concerning  different 
matters  may  be  expressed  by : 1 

1.  The  constitution-making  organ,  which  expresses  the  will  of 
the  state  as  to  the  form  of  governmental  organization  and  the 
fundamental  rights  of  the  individual. 

2.  Legislatures,  which  express  the  will  of  the  state  in  most  cases 
where  it  has  not  been  "expressed  in  the  constitution. 

3.  Executive  authorities,  either  as  a  result  of  constitutional  pro- 
vision or  of  powers  delegated  by  legislatures,  in  issuing  ordinances 
express  the  will  of  the  state  concerning  details  not  provided  for  by 
legislatures. 

Similarly,  the  following  authorities  are  engaged  in  the  execution 
of  state  will : 

1.  Judicial  authorities,  which,  in  case  of  controversy,  apply  the 
law  in  concrete  cases. 

2.  Executive  authorities,  which  have  general  supervision  over 
the  execution  of  state  will. 

3.  Administrative  authorities,   which  are  concerned  with  the 
scientific,  technical,  and  commercial  activities  of  the  government. 

If,  then,  the  government  of  each  state  is  a  unit,  engaged  in  ex- 
pressing and  executing  the  will  of  that  state,  a  certain  degree  of 
harmony  among  the  various  organs,  no  matter  how  extensively 
differentiated,  is  essential.  The  legally  expressed  will  must  be  put 
into  effect.  Obviously  the  formulation  of  law  is  both  antecedent 
and  superior  to  its  execution,  and  alTgi^t^JjF  thfiir  govern  m^nf  is 
to  be  efficient,  must  provide  some  means  of  securing  unity  of 
action  among  the  various  organs,  and  of  subordinating  organs 
engaged  in  executing  law  to  those  that  create  it.  The  system  of 

1  Goodnow,  Politics  and  Administration,  pp.  16,  17. 


230         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

parliamentary  government,  in  which  executive  is  legally  subordi- 
nated to  legislature,  has  proved  efficient  in  some  states.  In  the 
United  States,  where  separation  of  powers  has  been  pushed  to  an 
extreme  dangerous  to  the  unity  of  governmental  action,  political 
parties  have  arisen,  powerful  in  organization,  binding  together  all 
the  departments  of  government.  In  controlling  the  election  of 
both  those  bodies  that  express  and  those  that  administer  the  state's 
will,  and  in  determining  general  political  policy,  parties  secure 
that  harmony  which  successful  government  demands,  and  are 
receiving  increasing  legal  recognition  as  a  part  of  the  formal 
governmental  system. 

There  must,  then,  be  harmony  between  tKp  ^vprf  ^jof  anfi  ****_ 
execution  of  the  state's  will; l  and  in  democratic  states  the  organs 
that  express  this  will,  or  make  law,  must  have  some  control  over 
the  organs  that  execute  such  will  or  law.  This  control  may  be  found 
either  in  the  formal  government  or  outside,  in  the  political  parties. 
If,  however,  such  control  is  extended  beyond  the  limit  needed  to 
secure  orderly  and  harmonious  government,  administration  becomes 
inefficient  and  expression  of  the  real  will  of  the  state  is  made  diffi- 
cult. Within  the  general  control  exercised  by  legislature  or  political 
parties,  sound  policy  demands  a  sphere  of  independent  action  for 
executive,  and  especially  for  judicial,  officials.  Such  is  the  general 
theory  of  the  separation  of  powers  in  present  political  thought. 

99.  Division  of  powers.  States  not  only  distinguish  the  func- 
tions of  expressing  and  of  executing  their  wills,  but  they  also 
realize  that  certain  interests  are  of  general  nature,  affecting  the 
entire  state,  and  that  others  are  of  local  concern,  best  dealt  with 
by  smaller  units.  Hence  a  division  of  the  organs  of  government 
into  central  and  local  bodies  is  found.  As  previously  indicated,2 
the  fundamental  classification  of  state  organization,  on  this  basis  is 
into  unitary  and  federal  governments.  In  unitary  governments  all 
the  local  units  are  creatures  of  the  national  government,  and  their 
existence  and  theif  powers  may  be  modified  or  destroyed  at 
its  pleasure.  In  federations  the  component  commonwealths  are 
created  and  their  powers  outlined  by  the  constitution  of  "the -'state, 
and  neither  federal  government  nor  commonwealth  governments 

1  Goodnow,  Polities'  and  Administrationv  pp.  3^-38!         2  See' section  79. 


SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS         231 

may  legally  modify,  destroy,  or  encroach  upon  the  other.  Within 
these  commonwealths,  however,  are  several  degrees  of  local  units, 
legally  subordinate  to  their  respective  commonwealths,  being 
created  either  by  their  constitutions  or  by  their  legislatures.  Every 
state  thus  possesses  a  central  or  national  government ;  federal 
states  have  commonwealth  governments,  dividing  with  the  central 
government  the  fundamental  authority  of  the  state ;  and  all  states 
have  a  series  of  local  governments  exercising  powers  delegated  to 
them  by  the  superior  government  that  creates  them. 

In  spite  of  minor  differences  a  general  similarity  in  the  func- 
tions exercised  in  modern  states  by  the  various  governmental  units 
may  be  noted.  The  central  government  invariably  controls  rela- 
tions with  other  states  and  questions  of  general  policy,  —  foreign 
affairs,  war  and  peace,  national  finance,  and  internal  affairs  affect- 
ing general  welfare  lying  within  its  proper  scope.  To  the  divisions 
of  government  are  generally  left  the  relations  of  the  state  to  its 
citizens,  and  the  dealings  of  man  with  man,  especially  in  questions 
of  detailed  administration.  The  larger  units  regulate  business, 
property,  criminal  law,  education,  and  such  matters,  while  the 
smallest  units  are  concerned  with  public  order,  local  transportation, 
streets,  water,  lighting,  and  similar  interests. 

The  relations  existing  between  central  and  local  government 
open  up  some  of  the  most  important  problems  in  political  science. 
The  principle  of  local  self-government,  upon  which  modern  de- 
mocracies are  based,  requires  that  local  units  be  granted  a  fair 
degree  of  independence.  At  the  same  time,  to  maintain  that  unity 
necessary  for  efficient  government,  a  certain  control  must  be  ex- 
ercised by  the  central  government  over  all  local  units,  especially 
since,  besides  being  local  communities  dealing  with  questions  of 
local  concern,  they  are  administrative  districts  of  the  larger  units 
and  act  as  their  agents.  To  combine  local  independence  and  cen- 
tral control  two  general  methods  have  been  developed.1  The  cen- 
tral government  may  control  legislation,  leaving  administration 
largely  in  the  hands  of  local  officials  ;  or  the  central  government 
may  delegate  considerable  legislative  authority  to  local  governments, 
while  retaining  a  direct  supervision  jyver  administration. 

1  Goodnow,  Politics  and  Administration,  chap.  iii. 


232          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  former  system,  that  of  legislative  centralization  and  ad- 
ministrative decentralization,  is  characteristic  of  England  and  the 
United  States.  Detailed  laws  are  passed  by  the  central  legislatures 
and  little  scope  is  left  for  the  expression  of  local  will.  At  the  same 
time,  administration,  both  of  local  affairs  and  of  those  things  in 
which  the  local  unit  acts  as  an  agent  for  the  state,  is  in  the  hands 
of  local  officials  over  whom  the  central  government  exercises  little 
control.  This  system  is  in  keeping  with  the  English  and  American 
idea  of  legislative  supremacy,  but  results  not  only  in  constant  state 
interference  in  local  affairs,  but  also  in  nonenforcement  of  state 
laws  in  communities  where  those  laws  are  unpopular,  since 
enforcement  is  at  the  mercy  of  local  officials. 

The  system  of  legislative  decentralization  and  administrative 
centralization  prevails  in  France  and  Germany.  Local  commun- 
ities enjoy  greater  freedom  in  expressing  the  local  will,  central 
legislatures  granting  wide  powers  in  general  terms.  On  the  other 
hand,  local  officials  are  seldom  made  agents  for  the  execution  of 
state  laws  ;  and  even  in  carrying  out  distinctly  local  policies,  cen- 
trally appointed  officials  have  large  powers,  often  practically  nullify- 
ing the  will  of  the  local  community.  This  system  is  in  accordance 
with  the  continental  idea  of  subordinating  the  legislature  and  of 
granting  wide  discretionary  powers  to  administrative  officials. 

Both  of  these  systems  have  obvious  defects.  Administrative 
decentralization  sacrifices  the  interests  of  the  state  in  making 
difficult  the  execution  of  state  will  in  case  of  conflict  between  state 
and  local  community.  Legislative  decentralization  sacrifices  the 
interests  of  the  local  community  in  making  insufficient  provision 
for  the  execution  by  local  agents  of  the  local  will.  Accordingly  a 
strong  tendency  toward  compromise  is  evident.  England  and  the 
United  States  are  centralizing  their  administrative  systems  and  are 
granting  larger  powers  of  self-government  to  local  units.  In  the 
United  States  special  legislation  relative  to  localities  has  been  for- 
bidden, and  a  growing  belief  is  manifest  that  local  units  should 
be  protected  by  commonwealth  constitutions  against  the  common- 
wealth legislatures.  Especially  in  cities,  the  recent  tendency  to 
form  party  lines  on  municipal  issues  is  breaking  down  the  central- 
izing influence  of  the  national  political  parties.  On  the  continent 


SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS         233 

efforts  are  being  made  to  undo  the  highly  centralized  administra- 
tion by  creating  local  corporations  with  power  to  choose  their  own 
officials.  The  fact  that,  on  the  continent,  parties  are  less  strong 
and  interfere  less  in  local  politics  makes  a  successful  solution  of 
this  question  less  difficult. 

In  general,  states  whose  administration  is  centralized  are  more 
or  less  bureaucratic.1  That  is,  their  governments  are  composed  of 
specially  trained  officials  who  give  their  entire  time  to  public  serv- 
ice, whose  tenure  is  fairly  permanent,  and  whose  interests  are  dif- 
ferent from  those  of  the  mass  of  the  population.  In  such  states 
government  service  is  a  profession,  with  its  own  discipline  and 
solidarity,  and  the  official  class  is  responsible  to  superior  officers 
of  the  same  class  rather  than  to  public  opinion.  Rome  under 
the  Empire,  Prussia  in  the  eighteenth  century,  and  France  under 
Napoleon  were  good  examples  of  bureaucratic  organization,  while 
Germany  and  Japan  in  the  modern  world  show  the  strongest 
evidences  of  the  same  organization  and  spirit. 

This  centralized  system  has  the  merits  of  efficiency  and  econ- 
omy," its  public  officials  usually  being  able,  well-trained,  and  experi- 
enced. The  chief  dangers  lie  in  its  emphasis  on  form  and  routine 
and  its  disregard  of  public  opinion.  Hence  the  ordinary  citizens 
receive  little  political  education,  and  cannot  be  expected  to  take  a 
patriotic  and  loyal  interest  in  affairs  concerning  which  they  are 
ignorant  and  over  which  they  exercise  little  authority. 

On  the  other  hand,  decentralized  administration  is  usually  more 
responsive  to  popular  will.  Its  officials  are  drawn  at  intervals  from 
the  rank  and  file  of  the  population,  serve  often  without  pay,  and 
at  the  expiration  of  their  short  terms  of  service  return  to  private 
life.  No  official  class,  distinct  from  the  remainder  of  the  popu- 
lation, is  formed ;  and  governing  officials,  constantly  influenced  by 
public  opinion,  are  subject  to  the  control  of  popularly  chosen  rep- 
resentative bodies  rather  than  to  that  of  superior  administrative 
officers.  This  system,  while  sacrificing  efficiency  and  economy, 
secures  political  education  and  widespread  interest  in  public  affairs. 

Along  the  line  of  this  distinction  between  bureaucratic  and 
popular  administration,  which  in  the  last  analysis  is  mainly  one  of 

1  Garner,  Introduction  to  Political  Science,  pp.  197-200. 


234 


y 
INTRODUCTION  TO  .POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


spirit  and  not  of  form,  present  tendencies  also  point  toward  a  com- 
promise. Modern  states  aim  to  combine  the  practical  skill  of  a 
specially  trained,  permanent  administrative  service  with  the  polit- 
ical intelligence  and  stability  that  result  from  self-government  and 
popular  control.  The  creation  of  law  in  accordance  with  intelligent 
public  opinion  and  the  administration  of  law  by  specially  trained 
officials  seem  to  be  the  proper  adjustment. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XVIII 

REFERENCES 

STRUCTURE  OF  LEGISLATURES 

1.  NUMBERS 

2.  BICAMERAL  ORGANIZATION 

a.  Advantages  and  disadvantages 
COMPOSITION  OF  UPPER  HOUSES 

1.  IN  ENGLAND 

2.  IN  FRANCE 

3.  IN  GERMANY 

4.  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

COMPOSITION  OF  LOWER  HOUSES 

1.  GENERAL  FEATURES 

a.  Universal-suffrage  basis 

b.  Representation  according  to  population 

c.  District  ticket 

d.  Direct  election 

e.  Plurality  sufficient  to  elect 

2.  COMPOSITION 

a.  In  England 

b.  In  France 

c.  In  Germany 

d.  In  the  United  States 

COMPARATIVE  POWER  OF  THE  Two  HOUSES 
INTERNAL  ORGANIZATION 

1.  OFFICERS 

2.  COMMITTEES 

3.  PAY 

4.  PRIVILEGES 
METHOD  OF  PROCEDURE 

1.  ASSEMBLY  AND  ADJOURNMENT 

2.  INSTRUCTED  REPRESENTATION 

235 


236         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

3.  QUORUM 

4.  PARLIAMENTARY  RULES 

5.  INITIATION  OF  LEGISLATION 

6.  EXECUTIVE  VETO 

FUNCTIONS  OF  LEGISLATURES 

1.  FORMULATE  THE  LAW  OF  THE  LAND 

2.  CONTROL  FINANCE 

3.  INFLUENCE  INTERNATIONAL  DEALINGS 

4.  EXERCISE  CERTAIN  JUDICIAL  AND  ADMINISTRATIVE  POWERS 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

THE  LEGISLATURE 

/ 
REFERENCES 

BRYCE,  J.  The  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  I,  chaps,  i-xx 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  41-184 

FOLLETT,  M.  P.  The  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  262-302 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  Part  II,  chap,  ii 

LECKY,  W.  E.  H.  Democracy  and  Liberty,  Vol.  I,  chap,  iv 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  Governments   and  Parties   in    Continental   Europe,  Vol.  I,  pp. 

14-26,  252-272 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  The  Government  of  England,  Vol.  I,  chaps,  ix-xxiii 
McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  Part  III 
McCoNACHiE,  L.  G.  Congressional  Committees 
MEDLEY,  D.  J.  English  Constitutional  History,  chaps,  iii-v 
PORRITT,  E.  The  Unreformed  House  of  Commons 
PROCEEDINGS  OF  THE  AMERICAN  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  ASSOCIATION  (1907),  pp. 

69-140 

REINSCH,  P.  S.  American  Legislatures  and  Legislative  Methods 
SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chaps,  xxiii,  xxvii 
STATESMAN'S  YEAR-BOOK 
WILSON,  W.  The  State,  pp.  219-224,  257-268,  388-396,  527-535 

100.  Structure  of  legislatures.  The  gradual  process  by  which 
deliberate  creation  of  law  became  a  political  function,  and  the 
transfer  of  this  power  from  autocratic  rulers,  supported  by  groups 
of  nobility  and  clergy,  to  representative  bodies  including  all  classes, 
has  already  been  indicated.1  A  survey  of  these  legislative  bodies 
in  modern  states  now  demands  consideration. 

Lawmaking  organs  are  concerned  with  deliberation  and  discus- 
sion, with  the  balancing  of  policies  and  the  compromising  of 
conflicting  motives.  It  is  therefore  essential  that  they  include  a 
large  number  of  persons,  represent  all  important  sections,  inter- 
ests, and  classes,  and  derive  their  authority  ultimately  from  the 
mass  of  the  people.  Since  the  gain  in  breadth  of  view,  resulting 
from  large  numbers,  is  offset  by  increasing  unwieldiness,  as  size 

1  See  sections  34,  57,  59. 
237 


2^8          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

\J 

increases,  some  compromise  as  to  numbers  must  be  made.  Modern 
states  find  bodies  consisting  of  several  hundred  men  the  most 
satisfactory  adjustment. 

In  addition  to  their  large  size,  modern  legislative  bodies  secure 
further  deliberation  and  caution  by  a  separation  into  two  houses, 
forming  what  is  called  a  bicameral  legislature.  This  system  orig- 
inated rather  accidentally  in  England.  To  the  usual  council  of 
higher  nobility  and  clergy,  forming  the  advisers  of  the  king,  dele- 
gates from  the  shires  and  boroughs,  representing  the  lesser  nobility 
and  the  common  people,  were  added.  Since  the  lesser  clergy, 
meeting  separately  in  their  convocation,  were  not  included  in 
this  body,  a  natural  grouping  of  the  great  nobles  and  clergy  into 
one  House,  and  of  the  lesser  nobles  and  burgesses  into  another, 
took  place.  As  England  became  increasingly  industrial  and  com- 
mercial, the  king  was  compelled  to  rely  more  and  more  on  the 
support  of  this  latter  body  for  financial  aid,  and,  its  authority 
correspondingly  increasing,  transferred  the  balance  of  power,  dur- 
ing the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  from  the  Lords  to 
the  Commons. 

Because  of  this  historic  development,  —  the  British  upper  house 
being  an  aristocratic  institution,  —  the  idea  prevailed,  about  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  that  popular  sovereignty 
demanded  a  single  House,  responsible  directly  to  the  people.  The 
United  States  under  the  Confederation  tried  the  experiment  of  a 
single  House,  and  a  similar  plan  was  deliberately  adopted  by  the 
Constituent  Assembly  in  France  (1791)  and  again  in  the  second 
French  Republic  (1848).  The  unsuccessful  German  parliament 
of  1848  consisted  of  a  single  House;  several  American  common- 
wealths *  have  tried  this  method,  and  it  still  survives  in  the 
kingdom  of  Greece  and  in  the  Central  American  republics. 

At  present  all  the  important  states  have  a  legislative  body  of 
two  chambers.  In  some  cases,  as  in  the  United  States  and  Ger- 
many, it  is  the  historic  result  of  a  compromise  between  confederate 
and  national  interests  ;  in  most  European  states  it  is  a  compromise 
between  the  former  authority  of  the  nobility  and  the  growing  de- 
mand for  popular  government ;  in  other  states,  as  in  France,  the 

1  Georgia,  Pennsylvania  (1790),  Vermont  (1836). 


THE  LEGISLATURE  239 

South  American   republics,  and  Japan,   it   has  been  deliberately 
adopted  because  of  its  advantages.   These  may  be  stated  as  follows  : 

1.  It  secures  deliberation  and  caution  and  gives  better  balance 
and  more  carefully  analyzed  and   digested  legislation.    A  single 
House  is  in  danger  of  being  rash  and  one-sided,  swayed  by  emotion 
or  passion,  satisfied  with   incomplete  and  hasty  generalizations. 
Between  two  houses  there  is  likely  to  be  healthy  rivalry,  causing 
each  to  subject  the  measures  of  the  other  to  careful  scrutiny,  and 
resulting  in  more  careful  analysis  of  principles  than  would  be  the 
case  if  the  contest  were  between  a  majority  and  a  minority  in  a 
single  House  only. 

2.  It  makes  possible  a  more  correct  interpretation  of  general 
will.    A  single  House,  especially  if  all  its  members  are  elected  at 
one  time,  is  in  danger  of  growing  out  of  sympathy  with  popular 
opinion  before  its  term  expires.    Two  houses,  chosen  at  different 
times  or  for  different  terms,  may  remedy  this  defect,  at  the  same 
time   securing  that  balance  of  conservatism  and  radicalism  that 
results  in  real  progress. 

3.  It  maintains  the  independence  of  the  executive.    In  modern 
democracies  a  single  House,  feeling  that  it  represented  popular 
will,  would  tend  to  subject  the  executive  to  its  control,  thus  de- 
stroying  that  separation  between  legislation  and  administration 
that  good  government  demands.    Two  houses,  checking  each  other, 
give  greater  freedom  to  the  executive,  and  in  the  long  run  secure 
the  best  interests  of  both  departments. 

Against  these  advantages  it  may  be  urged  that  the  bicameral 
system  is  a  transitional  stage  in  political  development ;  and  that,  as 
ideas  of  confederacy  and  class  spirit  are  replaced  by  national  de- 
mocracy, a  single  organ,  composed  and  proceeding  in  such  a  way  as 
to  represent  the  real  wishes  of  the  people,  would  be  the  logical  law- 
making  body.  For  effective  representation,  harmonious  coopera- 
tion, timely  concession,  and  apt  adjustment,  "a  common  discussion 
in  one  broadly  representative  Chamber  must  surpass  in  value  any 
series  of  discussions  conducted  first  by  persons  having  exclusively 
one  order  of  interests  and  afterwards  by  those  having  exclusively 
another  order."  l 

1  Amos,  The  Science  of  Politics,  p.  245. 


240         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

101.  Composition  of  upper  houses.  The  upper  houses  of  modern 
states  exhibit  considerable  diversity  in  structure  and  usually  con- 
tain important  survivals  of  past  historic  development.  In  the 
qualifications  and  methods  of  choice  of  their  members  they  often 
show  traces  of  the  class  control  that  preceded  modern  democracy ; 
and  in  the  basis  of  their  representation,  especially  in  federations, 
they  indicate  the  historic  units  by  whose  combination  the  state  was 
formed.  As  distinguished  from  the  lower  houses,  which  are  usually 
chosen  directly  and  are  representative  of  the  people  according  to 
numbers,  the  upper  houses  are  chosen  indirectly,  and  in  many 
cases  represent  the  local  governmental  organizations. 

The  composition  of  upper  houses  is  based  on  the  principles 
of  heredity,  appointment,  election,  or  a  combination  of  these.  In 
England,  Prussia,  Japan,  Hungary,  Spain,  and  Italy  a  greater  or 
less  proportion  of  the  members  hold  their  office  by  hereditary 
right.  In  several  of  these  states  a  small  number  of  church  officials 
also  hold  seats  by  virtue  of  their  office.  Appointment  is  used  to  a 
considerable  degree  on  the  continent,  is  ordinarily  controlled  by 
the  executive,  and  the  offices  thus  rilled  are  held  for  a  life  term. 
Election,  either  direct  or  indirect,  is  used  in  the  United  States, 
the  other  American  republics,  and  in  France,  Belgium,  and  the 
commonwealth  of  Australia.  To  avoid  making  the  upper  house, 
when  elective,  a  duplication  of  the  lower,  several  methods  are  in 
use.  Sometimes  a  different  basis  of  representation  is  taken  ;  in- 
direct election  is  the  usual  method  of  choice,  and,  by  a  difference 
in  the  length  of  terms  or  by  partial  renewal,  additional  variation  is 
secured. 

The  composition  of  the  upper  houses  in  several  important  states 
may  be  viewed  more  specifically. 

I.  England.  The  English  House  of  Lords  consists  (1914)  of 
six  hundred  and  thirty  members.  These  include  two  archbishops 
and  twenty-four  bishops  of  the  established  church,  holding  seats 
by  virtue  of  their  ecclesiastical  office.  Sixteen  are  Scotch  peers, 
elected  by  the  whole  body  of  Scotch  peers  from  their  own  number, 
holding  office  only  during  the  existence  of  the  Parliament  for 
which  they  are  chosen.  Twenty-eight  are  Irish  peers,  chosen  for 
life  by  the  entire  body  of  Irish  peers.  Four  are  eminent  jurists, 


THE  LEGISLATURE  241 

appointed  for  life  by  the  crown  to  supply  legal  knowledge  when 
the  House  sits  as  a  court.  The  remainder  are  English  peers,  whose 
seats  are  hereditary.  Additional  members  may  be  appointed  by 
the  crown,  their  seats  also  becoming  hereditary.  Members  of 
the  House  of  Lords  must  be  male  British  subjects  twenty-one 
years  of  age. 

2.  France.    The  French  Senate  consists  of  three  hundred  mem- 
bers.   These  are  distributed  among  the  departments  into  which 
France  is  divided,  roughly  in  proportion  to  their  population,  the 
number  chosen  from  each  ranging  from  one  to  ten.    In  addition, 
the  territory  of  Belfort,  each  of  the  three  departments  of  Algeria, 
and  several  of  the  colonies  are  represented  by  one  senator  each. 
They  are  elected  indirectly  by  bodies  composed  of  (a)  delegates 
chosen  by  the  municipal  council  of  each  commune  in  proportion 
to  its  population,   and  of  (b)  the  senators,  deputies,  councilors- 
general,  and  district  councilors  of  the  department.    In  1875  the 
two  chambers  elected  seventy-five  senators  for  life,  but  the  Senate 
Bill  of  1884  provided  that,  as  these  seats  became  vacant,  they 
should  be  filled  by  regular  election,  the  department  having  the 
right  to  the  vacant  seat  to  be  determined  by  lot.    Senators  are 
elected  for  nine  years,  changing  by  thirds,  and  the  qualifications 
are  French  citizenship,  the  attainment  of  the  fortieth  year,  and 
the  possession  of  full  civil  and  political  rights. 

3.  Germany.    The  German  Reichsrat,  or  Federal  Council,  con- 
sists of  fifty-five   members.     These  are   distributed  among  the 
commonwealths  composing  the  republic,  Prussia  having  twenty- 
two,  Bavaria  seven,   Saxony  five,  and  so  on.     Like  the  former 
Bundesrath,  this  body  represents  the  commonwealths  rather  than 
the  people  directly.   The  constitution  provides  that  each  common- 
wealth with  a  population  of  one  million  is  entitled  to  one  vote; 
each  with  a  population  of  more  than  that  number  is  entitled  to  a 
vote  for  each  million  people  and  an  additional  vote  for  any  frac- 
tion thereof  which  equals  the  number  of  inhabitants  of  the  least 
populous  commonwealth.   No  commonwealth  may  have  more  than 
two  fifths  of  all  the  votes.    This  is  intended  to  keep  the  pre- 
dominance of  Prussia  within  bounds.    Commonwealths  must  be 
represented  in  the  Reichsrat  by  members  of  their  cabinets. 


242          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

4.  The  United  States.  The  United  States  Senate  consists 
(1914)  of  ninety-six  members,  two  from  each  commonwealth. 
The  Constitution  provides  that  each  commonwealth  shall  have 
equal  representation  in  the  Senate,  and  attempts  to  secure  this 
survival  of  confederatism  against  ordinary  process  of  amendment.1 
Under  the  Seventeenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution,  ratified 
in  1913,  members  are  chosen  by  direct  popular  election.  The 
term  is  six  years,  changing  by  thirds,  and  senators  must  be  thirty 
years  of  age,  citizens  of  the  United  States  for  nine  years,  and 
residents  of  the  commonwealth  from  which  they  are  chosen. 

102.  Composition  of  lower  houses.  In  contrast  to  the  diversity 
in  method  of  choice  and  in  basis  of  representation  that  is  found  in 
upper  legislative  chambers,  modern  states  are  in  substantial  har- 
mony concerning  the  composition  of  their  lower  houses.  These 
bodies,  coming  into  power  as  the  result  of  the  democratic  develop- 
ment of  the  past  century,  contain  few  historic  remnants,  and  show 
practical  agreement  on  the  following  points  : 

1.  Their  source  is   derived  from  a  suffrage  nearly  universal. 
Subject  to  certain  qualifications,  previously  considered,2  modern 
states  extend  the  right  of  choosing  representatives,  and  of  eligi- 
bility to  membership  in  the  lower  chamber,  to  a  large  number  of 
citizens. 

2.  The  distribution  of  representation  is  according  to  population. 
While  some  regard  is  paid  to  local  governmental  divisions,  and 
while  varying  rates  of  increase   in  population  prevent  exact  or 
permanent  apportionment,  these  are  mere  modifications  that  do 
not  affect  the  principle  of  proportionality. 

3.  Representatives  are  chosen  on  district  ticket.    Election  by 
general  ticket  has  been  tried,  but  it  subordinates  the  voter  too 
completely  to  the  party  machinery  and  destroys  the  representation 
of  minorities. 

4.  Direct  election  is  the  method  of  choice.    There  is  a  general 
feeling  that  no  intermediate  body  should  separate  the  holders  of 
suffrage  and  their  representatives  in  the  lower  chamber. 

5.  Ordinarily  a   plurality  elects.    While   in  several    European 
states  an  absolute   majority  is  required   for  election  on  the  first 

1  United  States  Constitution,  Article  V.  2  See  section  91. 


THE  LEGISLATURE 

ballot,  such  a  principle,  if  universal,  would  be  inconvenient  and 
often  impossible. 

A  more  detailed  view  of  the  composition  of  the  lower  house  in 
several  important  states  follows. 

1.  England.    The  English  House  of  Commons  consists  (1920) 
of   seven    hundred    and    seven    members,    representing    county, 
borough,  and  University  constituencies  in  England  and  Wales, 
Scotland,  and  Ireland.    These  are  divided  into  election  districts, 
averaging  about  sixty  thousand  inhabitants  each,  and  each  sends 
one  member  to  Parliament.   The  University  constituencies,  sending 
fifteen  men,  average  only  five  thousand  electors  each.    Members 
of  the  House  of  Commons  need  not  be  residents  of  the  district 
that  they  represent,  the  English  principle  being  that  each  mem- 
ber represents  the  whole  Empire.    The  term  is  five  years,  unless 
Parliament  is  previously  dissolved,  and  a  member  cannot  resign. 
He  may,  however,  be  appointed  to  one  of  several  sinecure  offices, 
acceptance  of  which  vacates  his  seat. 

2.  France.    The  French  Chamber  of  Deputies  consists  (1920) 
of  six  hundred  and  twenty-six  members.    The  electoral  law  of 
France  was  revised  in  1919.    Under  the  new  system  the  depart- 
ment  becomes   the   electoral   area,    each   being   entitled  to   one 
deputy  for  every  seventy-five  thousand  inhabitants,  with  a  minimum 
of  three.    Each  department  entitled  to  more  than  six  deputies  is 
divided  into  districts  electing  three  to  six  each.    A  complicated 
system  of  proportional  voting  is  used  in  selecting  the  deputies  in 
each  department.    Nomination  is  made  by  petition.   France  admits 
to  her  national  legislature  members  with  the  privilege  of  voting 
from  a  number  of  her  colonial  possessions.    Deputies  must  be 
twenty-five  years  of  age  and  qualified  voters,  and  each  candidate 
may  stand  for  one  district  only.    The  term  of  office  is  four  years. 

3.  Germany.    The  German  Reichstag  consists  (1920)  of  four 
hundred  and  sixty-six  members,  chosen  in  single  election  districts 
created  by  national  law.    This  is  the  only  part  of  the  former  im- 
perial government  that  has  been  taken  over  without  change,  even 
of  name,  into  the  new  republic.    The  constitution  requires  that  all 
members  shall  be  chosen  by  "universal,  equal,  direct,  and  secret 
suffrage  by  all  men  and   women   over  twenty  years  of  age,  in 


244          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

accordance  with  the  principles  of  proportional  representation." 
The  term  is  four  years.  Apportionment  is  made  by  national  law, 
the  members  being  distributed  according  to  population.  For  this 
reason  more  than  half  the  entire  membership  comes  from  Prussia. 
Members  of  the  Reichstag  are  considered  representatives  of  the 
entire  German  people,  not  of  the  separate  commonwealths,  and  are 
not  bound  by  instructions,  as  are  the  members  of  the  upper  house. 

4.  The  United  States.  The  House  of  Representatives  consists 
(1920)  of  four  hundred  and  thirty-five  members,  representing 
the  people  of  the  United  States  according  to  the  population  of 
their  respective  commonwealths.  Each  commonwealth  is  entitled 
to  at  least  one  representative,  and,  on  the  basis  of  the  census  of 
1910,  each  commonwealth  is  given  one  member  for  every  211,- 
877  inhabitants ;  if  its  population  exceeds  by  a  large  fraction  an 
even  number  of  times  that  many  inhabitants,  it  is  given  an  ad- 
ditional representative.  By  Act  of  Congress  a  redistribution  of 
seats  among  the  several  commonwealths  is  made  after  each 
decennial  census,  and  every  commonwealth  is  divided  by  its  legis- 
lature into  districts,  sending  one  representative  each.  It  sometimes 
happens  that  one  or  more  representatives  are  chosen  "  at  large  " 
by  the  voters  of  an  entire  commonwealth,  pending  a  redistribution 
of  districts.  At  present  five  commonwealths  send  one  representative 
each,  while  New  York  is  entitled  to  forty-three.  The  territories 
and  colonies  of  the  United  States  are  represented  by  delegates  who 
may  share  in  discussion  but  may  not  vote.  Representatives  must 
be  twenty-five  years  of  age,  citizens  of  the  United  States  for  seven 
years,  and  residents  in  the  commonwealths  from  which  they  are 
chosen.  The  term  is  two  years. 

103.  Comparative  power  of  the  two  houses.  In  the  general 
process  of  lawmaking  the  theory  that  the  houses  are  equal  and 
coordinate  prevails.  Either  House  may  originate  a  bill  or  propose 
amendments,  and  the  consent  of  both  houses  is  necessary  both 
for  amendment  and  for  the  final  adoption  of  a  measure.  The  one 
exception  to  this  parity  of  powers  gives  to  the  lower  house  in  some 
states  a  greater  control  over  the  raising  and  spending  of  money. 
This  distinction  arose  in  the  English  Parliament  during  the  four- 
teenth century,  when  the  members  of  the  upper  house  were  largely 


THE  LEGISLATURE  245 

exempt  from  taxation,  and  the  representatives  of  those  who  paid 
the  taxes  were  naturally  regarded  as  having  the  power  to  vote 
taxes  and  expenditures.  In  several  other  states  a  similar  distinc- 
tion has  been  adopted,  partly  in  imitation  of  the  English  system, 
partly  to  avoid  danger  of  deadlock  on  a  question  so  important  as 
that  of  revenue  and  expenditure,  and  partly  because  of  the  idea 
that  the  lower  house,  more  directly  and  proportionately  repre- 
senting the  people,  should  be  intrusted  with  this  power.  While 
the  British  House  of  Lords  may  not  originate,  amend,  or  reject 
a  money  bill,  the  upper  houses  in  Prussia  and  the  Netherlands 
may  reject,  though  forbidden  to  originate  or  amend.  The  United 
States  Senate  is  forbidden  to  originate  bills  for  raising  revenue, 
but  uses  its  power  to  amend  or  reject  so  freely  that  it  has  prac- 
tically full  power.  The  procedure  in  France  is  similar  to  that  in 
the  United  States,  except  that  the  budget  is  presented  by  the 
ministry.  Appropriation  bills  must  originate  in  the  lower  house, 
but  the  upper  house  may  amend  or  reject. 

Though  otherwise  equal  in  theory,  the  two  houses  show  in  actual 
practice  considerable  difference  in  authority.  The  growth  of  democ- 
racy has  shifted  the  balance  of  power  from  the  upper  houses,  with 
their  survivals  of  heredity  and  class  rule,  to  the  lower  houses,  more 
closely  representing  the  interests  of  the  masses.  Especially  in 
states  having  a  parliamentary  form  of  government  is  this  develop- 
ment marked.  If  the  administration  is  responsible  to  the  people 
through  their  elected  representatives,  added  weight  is  given  to  the 
lower  house  in  case  of  contest  with  the  upper.  In  France,  Italy, 
Spain,  and  the  majority  of  European  states  upper  houses  are 
comparatively  weak ;  and  in  England  the  House  of  Lords,  if  it 
oppose  the  House  of  Commons  on  a  point  concerning  which  the 
people  have  definitely  expressed  their  opinion,  must  yield.  A  bill 
passed  by  the  Commons  three  times  within  two  years  is  law,  despite 
the  Lords'  veto.  In  the  German  republic  and  the  United  States 
the  power  of  the  upper  houses  is  exceptional.  The  control  of  the 
United  States  Senate  over  treaties  and  appointments,  its  longer 
term  and  more  select  membership,  and  its  historic  traditions  as 
representing  the  commonwealths  have  given  it  a  prestige  and 
power  even  greater  than  that  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 


246          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  German  Reichsrat,  representing  the  governments  of  the 
component  units  of  the  republic,  is  a  sort  of  advisory  council. 

In  states  where  one  House  is  not  sufficiently  powerful  to  force 
the  other  to  yield,  danger  of  deadlock  is  usually  averted  by  the 
control  which  political  parties  exercise  over  both  houses,  or  by  a 
system  of  conference  committees,  composed  of  members  of  each 
House,  whose  duty  it  is  to  arrange  compromises.  In  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  Australian  commonwealth,  where  considerable  difficulty 
has  been  caused  by  serious  disagreement  between  the  houses,  the 
governor-general  is  authorized  to  dissolve  both  houses  if  the  Senate 
persistently  refuses  to  pass  a  bill  submitted  by  the  House ;  and  in 
case  the  deadlock  remains  after  the  new  election,  a  joint  session 
is  held  and  a  majority  vote  considered  final. 

104.  Internal  organization.  Legislative  bodies  usually  deter- 
mine their  own  internal  organization,  though  in  some  cases  this 
is  partially  provided  for  in  the  constitution.  For  instance,  pre- 
siding officers  are  usually  elected  by  the  houses,  but  the  vice  presi- 
dent presides  over  the  United  States  Senate ;  some  member  of 
the  national  cabinet  presides  over  the  German  Reichsrat;  and 
in  the  English  House  of  Lords  the  lord  chancellor,  a  member  of 
the  ministry  and  sometimes  a  commoner,  presides.  Most  lower 
houses  elect  their  own  officials.  Similarly,  each  House  is  usually 
allowed  to  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  its  members,  although  in 
England  this  authority  has  been  delegated  to  the  courts. 

In  the  United  States  members  of  the  legislature  are  not  allowed 
to  hold  any  federal  executive  or  judicial  office.  In  England  and 
France,  while  the  holders  of  certain  offices  are  excluded  from  the 
legislature,  and  while  appointment  to  office  of  any  sort. unseats  a 
representative,  he  may,  if  reflected  after  appointment,  hold  both 
offices.  Obviously  this  does  not  apply  to  the  English  House  of 
Lords.  In  the  German  lower  house  also  a  member  may  hold 
another  office,  if  reflected  subsequent  to  his  appointment ;  while 
the  members  of  the  upper  house,  acting  under  the  appointment  of 
their  commonwealths,  are  not  affected  by  holding  other  office.  In 
the  United  States  the  heads  of  administration  are  excluded  by  law 
from  membership  in  the  legislature,  and,  except  for  the  president, 
are  prevented  by  custom  from  appearing  or  speaking  before  that 


THE  LEGISLATURE 


247 


body ;  in  England,  Germany,  and  France  the  heads  of  departments 
are  regularly  members  of  the  legislature  and  are  the  responsible 
leaders  of  the  majority  party  or  of  a  controlling  coalition. 

The  size  of  modern  legislative  bodies,  and  the  volume  of  business 
with  which  they  must  deal,  necessitate  some  division  of  labor.  This 
is  secured  by  means  of  a  system  of  committees,  which  act  as  units 
in  practically  rejecting  the  greater  part  of  proposed  legislation  and 
in  shaping  the  remainder  for  final  consideration  by  the  entire  body. 
Since  the  actual  work  of  legislation  is  largely  in  the  hands  of  these 
committees,  their  composition  becomes  a  matter  of  importance.  In 
the  United  States,  where  this  system  has  been  most  fully  devel- 
oped, the  Senate  elects  its  committees,  though  in  practice  the 
slate  is  prearranged  by  the  party  leaders.  The  committees  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  formerly  appointed  by  the  Speaker,  are 
now  elected  by  the  House  as  the  result  of  party  caucuses.1  In  Eng- 
land the  real  committee  is  the  cabinet,  which  shapes  all  legislation 
of  importance.  In  France,  except  for  matters  of  finance  which 
are  controlled  by  special  standing  committees  chosen  for  one  year 
by  each  House,  the  following  peculiar  system  is  in  use.  The  mem- 
bers of  each  House  are  divided  by  lot  monthly  into  bureaux,  of 
which  there  are  nine  in  the  Senate  and  eleven  in  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies.  From  these  are  elected,  each  bureau  contributing 
its  member  or  members,  special  committees  for  almost  every  bill 
presented.  In  the  former  German  Empire  there  were  standing 
committees,  some  chosen  by  the  emperor,  in  the  upper  house,  and 
temporary  committees  based  upon  sections  chosen  by  lot,  as  in 
France,  in  the  lower  house.  How  the  committee  system  will  work 
out  under  the  present  constitution  cannot  yet  be  assured.  Thus 
far  the  cabinet,  as  in  England,  has  directed  the  most  important 
legislation.  The  new  constitution  provides  for  certain  standing 
committees,  especially  for  foreign  affairs,  in  the  lower  house. 

In  the  actual  working  of  committees  considerable  difference 
is  found.  Committees  play  little  part  in  revision  in  Germany; 

1  On  March  19,  1910,  the  House  voted  that  the  Committee  on  Rules,  the  most 
powerful  of  its  committees,  should  be  elected  by  the  House,  and  that  the  Speaker 
should  not  be  a  member.  By  this  change  the  power  of  the  Speaker  has  been 
considerably  reduced. 


248          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

important  bills  are  sometimes  not  even  referred  to  them.  In  France, 
where  the  legislature  is  all-powerful,  and  where  the  committees 
usually  insist  on  revising  the  bills  submitted  to  them,  the  method 
of  choosing  the  committees  often  results  in  forcing  a  majority  bill 
to  run  the  gantlet  of  a  hostile  committee.  The  preponderance  of 
the  cabinet  prevents  powerful  committees  in  England,  while  in 
the  United  States  the  party  system  makes  committees  of  great  im- 
portance. 

On  the  subject  of  pay  of  members  there  is  considerable  difference 
of  opinion.  The  United  States  by  constitutional  law,  and  France  by 
statute,  provide  for  salaried  representation.  A  law  for  the  payment 
of  small  salaries  to  members  of  the  German  Reichstag  was  passed  in 
1906,  and  a  law  for  the  payment  of  members  of  the  English  House 
of  Commons  was  passed  in  1911.  On  the  one  hand  it  is  urged 
that  moderate  salaries  will  secure  a  better  class  of  legislators,  since 
men  of  intelligence,  whether  rich  or  not,  will  be  able  to  serve,  and 
that  salaries  remove  the  temptation  to  employ  questionable  means 
for  gaining  a  livelihood  when  in  state  service.  At  the  same  time, 
any  salary  is  likely  to  be  sought  by  persons  poorly  qualified,  and  it 
does  not  necessarily  remove  the  temptation  to  dishonesty.  Those 
favoring  unpaid  service  claim  that  it  secures  a  better  and  more 
independent  class  of  legislators,  men  of  independent  means  usually 
being  of  superior  intelligence  and  ability,  and  not  likely  to  be 
tempted  to  use  office  for  personal  gain,  ilt  must  be  remembered, 
however,  that  the  possession  of  wealth  is  not  a  sure  test  of  ability, 
and  that  men  of  wealth  are  often  most  desirous  for  more  wealth, 
and  hence  easily  tempted  to  illicit  means  of  gain. 

It  is  a  general  principle  of  constitutional  law  and  of  custom  that 
members  of  the  legislature  are  free  from  arrest  during  the  session. 
This  is  not  absolute,  since  in  England  and  the  United  States 
members  may  be  arrested  if  charged  with  an  indictable  offense  ;  in 
France  and  Germany,  if  taken  in  the  commission  of  the  misdemeanor 
or  crime,  or,  with  the  consent  of  the  chamber  to  which  they  belong, 
at  any  time.  This  latter  provision  makes  it  possible  for  the  cham- 
ber to  protect  offenders,  or  to  persecute  members  by  permitting 
their  arrest  for  party  reasons.  Freedom  of  speech  is  also  guaran- 
teed, members  being  responsible  only  to  the  House  to  which  they 


THE  LEGISLATURE 

belong  for  statements  made  in  debate.  Germany  and  France  at- 
tempt to  add  to  this  privilege  special  restrictions  against  insult  to 
members  of  the  legislature  by  persons  outside  that  body. 

105.  Method  of  procedure.  Just  as  legislative  bodies  find  certain 
internal  organization  necessary  for  efficient  action,  so  certain  modes 
of  procedure,  determined  either  by  constitutional  law  or  by  legis- 
latures themselves,  are  universal.  In  assembly  and  adjournment 
considerable  variation  is  found. 

The  United  States  Congress  must  assemble  annually,  and  may 
be  called  in  special  session  by  the  president.  Joint  agreement  of 
the  two  houses  is  necessary  for  adjournment.  In  case  of  disagree- 
ment as  to  time  of  adjournment  the  executive  may  decide,  and 
each  House  may  adjourn  separately  for  three  days.  The  executive 
has  no  power  of  dissolution,  nothing  but  the  expiration  of  the  term 
of  its  members  destroying  the  legislature. 

The  English  Parliament  must  assemble  once  in  three  years,  but 
since  appropriations  are  voted  for  a  single  year,  annual  sessions  are 
held.  Parliament  is  summoned  by  the  crown,  acting,  however,  on 
the  advice  of  the  prime  minister,  and  adjournment  for  a  short  time 
may  be  undertaken  by  either  House.  The  dissolution  of  Parliament 
may  take  place  either  by  the  expiration  of  the  five-year  term  of 
its  members,  or  by  an  order  of  the  crown  compelling  new  elec- 
tions. This  latter  method  is  used  at  the  request  of  the  prime 
minister,  if,  when  his  cabinet  is  no  longer  supported  by  a  majority 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  he  wishes  an  appeal  to  be  made  to  the 
electorate  to  determine  its  will.  The  average  length  of  a  Parliament 
is  about  four  years. 

In  Germany  the  legislature  was  formerly  assembled  and  dis- 
solved by  the  emperor.  In  the  present  republic  the  Reichstag 
must  assemble  annually  and  must  hold  its  first  meeting  within 
thirty  days  of  its  election.  A  long  interval  between  election  and 
assembly,  as  in  the  United  States,  is  impossible.  The  president 
may  dissolve  the  Reichstag,  but  only  once  for  the  same  reason,  and 
new  elections  must  be  held  within  sixty  days.  The  ministers  must 
assemble  the  Reichsrat  on  demand  of  one  third  of  its  members. 

The  French  legislature  must  meet  annually  and  remain  in  ses- 
sion at  least  five  months,  and  the  president  must  call  extra  sessions 


250          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

if  demanded  by  a  majority  of  each  Chamber.  Either  House  may 
adjourn  for  short  periods,  but  the  session  must  close  for  both 
houses  at  the  same  time.  The  president  may  adjourn  the  legis- 
lature, but  not  for  a  longer  time  than  one  month,  nor  more  than 
once  in  a  session.  The  president,  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate, 
acting  through  his  ministers,  who  are  responsible  to  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies,  may  dissolve  the  legislature.  The  consent  of  both 
chambers  is  thus  practically  required  for  their  dissolution. 

Publicity  of  procedure  is  required,  either  by  law  or  by  custom, 
in  all  these  bodies  except  the  German  Reichsrat.  In  it  alone  are 
members  obliged  to  follow  the  instructions  of  their  governments. 
While  representatives  usually  consider  the  wishes  and  look  out  for 
the  interests  of  those  whom  they  represent,  the  general  principle  of 
uninstructed  representation  characterizes  modern  legislatures.  The 
instructed  representation  of  the  Reichsrat  compels  the  members 
of  each  commonwealth  to  vote  as  a  unit,  while  in  the  other  bodies 
each  member  votes  as  he  sees  fit.  This  condition  in  Germany 
represents  a  survival  of  confederation. 

The  quorum,  or  number  of  members  whose  presence  is  required 
to  legalize  legislative  action,  is  fixed  by  the  constitution  for  the 
German  Reichstag  and  for  both  houses  in  the  United  States ;  in 
the  other  chambers  it  is  left  to  the  determination  of  each  House. 
In  both  houses  of  the  legislatures  of  France  and  the  United 
States  and  in  the  German  Reichstag  a  majority  of  the  members  is 
necessary  for  a  quorum.  The  position  of  the  cabinet,  representing 
the  majority  party  and  directing  the  process  of  legislation,  makes 
a  majority  quorum  unnecessary  in  England ;  consequently  three 
members  of  the  House  of  Lords  and  forty  members  of  the  House 
of  Commons  are  sufficient  to  conduct  business.  In  the  United 
States  a  two-thirds  majority  of  the  Senate  is  required  to  ratify 
treaties  and  appointments ;  and  the  members  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  vote  by  states  in  electing  the  president  in  case 
no  candidate  receives  a  majority  of  the  electoral  votes. 

All  lawmaking  bodies  find  it  necessary  to  draw  up  certain 
rules  of  procedure.  The  purpose  of  these  rules  is  to  prevent 
undue  haste  or  ill-considered  action,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
prevent  delay  or  confusion.  To  accomplish  these  ends,  while 


THE  LEGISLATURE 


251 


making  it  possible  for  the  majority  to  secure  its  will,  methods  of 
procedure  are  necessary  whose  intricacy  of  detail  and  formality 
often  seem  at  first  sight  cumbrous  and  needlessly  complicated. 
Among  the  most  important  rules  are  those  concerned  with  attend- 
ance, counting  of  votes,  order  of  business,  and  debate.  The  latter 
includes  such  questions  as  who  may  speak,  how  long  he  may 
speak,  and  how  debate  may  be  brought  to  an  end.  Most  legis- 
lative bodies  allow  means  by  which  a  vote  may  be  taken  on  the 
question  of  closing  discussion  and  deciding  the  matter  at  issue, 
and  time  limits  are  often  placed  on  debate.  The  United  States 
Senate  has  recently  provided  a  means  of  checking  debate,  but 
seldom  uses  it  in  practice. 

Legislation  originates  in  various  ways.  Kings  and  emperors 
initiate  bills  through  their  ministers  ;  responsible  executives,  by 
recommendation  or  through  the  heads  of  departments,  suggest 
legislation  ;  and  in  parliamentary  governments  it  is  the  practice 
for  all  measures  of  importance  to  be  prepared  by  the  ministry. 
Committees  or  commissions  are  often  authorized  to  consider  cer- 
tain questions  and  recommend  suitable  measures,  and  these  often 
hold  public  hearings  at  which  interested  persons  may  express  their 
opinions.  In  Mexico  the  commonwealths  composing  the  federa- 
tion may  introduce  bills  directly,  and  in  republics  any  member  of 
either  House  may  propose  legislation.  Citizens  or  bodies  of  citizens 
may  request  certain  legislation  by  petition,  and  in  some  states  the 
electorate,  by  means  of  the  initiative,  may  formulate  or  suggest 
certain  lines  of  policy. 

The  procedure  of  legislation  shows  general  uniformity.  A  bill 
usually  receives  several  readings,  and  is  considered  by  a  committee 
which  reports  favorably  or  unfavorably  before  it  is  finally  acted 
upon.  A  majority  in  both  houses,  a  quorum  being  present,  is 
necessary  for  passing,  and  certain  influence  over  legislation  is  given 
to  the  executive.  In  the  German  republic  provision  is  made  for 
submitting  measures  to  a  national  referendum.  No  such  legislative 
device  exists  in  the  national  governments  of  France,  England,  or 
the  United  States.  In  the  French  Senate  a  majority  of  its  whole 
membership,  not  merely  of  a  quorum,  is  required  in  order  to  pass 
a  measure.  The  power  of  the  executive  varies.  The  president  of 


252          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  United  States  has  a  veto  which  may  be  overridden  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote.  The  French  president's  suspensive  veto  compels  the 
legislature  to  reconsider  a  bill,  but  a  second  passage  by  ordinary 
majority  is  all  that  is  required.  The  legal  veto  power  of  the 
English  king  has  never  been  destroyed  by  statute,  but  is  never 
used  in  practice.  The  German  president  has  no  veto,  but  under 
certain  conditions  he  may  submit  measures  passed  by  the  national 
legislature  to  a  popular  referendum. 

106.  Functions  of  legislatures.  In  the  formulation  of  legislative 
policy  three  main  systems  are  in  use. 

1 .  The  will  of  an  autocratic  ruler,  expressed  through  his  minis- 
ters, is  practically  forced  on  the  legislature,  and  their  province  in 
important  legislation  is  limited  to  acceptance  or  feeble  protest.  This 
was  until  recently  the  situation  in  Austria,  in  the  German  Empire, 
and  in  the  futile  attempts  at  a  representative  legislature  in  Russia. 
At  present,  even  in  the  most  despotic  states,  the  control  of  repre- 
sentative assemblies  over  lawmaking  is  increasing. 

2.  The  will  of  the  legislature,  expressed  through  a  responsible 
ministry  representing  the  majority  party,  is  supreme,  and  little  or 
no  power  of  resistance  is  left  to  the  executive.    This  is  the  case  in 
England,  Italy,  France,  and  other  European  states.   In  this  system 
the  heads  of  the  administration  are  also  leading  members  of  the 
legislature,  and  harmonious  governmental  action  is  assured. 

3.  A  balancing  of  authority  between  the  houses  and  between  the 
legislature  and  the  executive  may  exist.  In  this  case  political  parties, 
through  caucuses  guided  by  the  leading  members  of  each  House, 
determine  the  legislative  policy.    If  executive  and  both  houses  are 
in  harmony,  consistent  and  active  legislation  is  easy  to  secure ;  if 
not,  legislation  is  either  prevented  or  secured  only  after  a  series  of 
compromises.    This  is  the  case  in  the  United  States. 

The  functions  of  lawmaking  bodies,  making  due  allowance  for 
differences  in  detail  and  in  scope  of  authority,  may  be  classified 
as  follows  : 1 

i.  They  formulate  the  law  of  the  land,  removing  obsolete  pro- 
visions and  adapting  legislation  to  the  changing  conditions  of 
modern  life. 

1  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  p.  205. 


THE  LEGISLATURE  253 

2.  They  control  the   finances  of   the   state,   determining   the 
method  of  raising  money,  the  amount  to  be  raised,  and  the  pur- 
pose of  its  expenditure. 

3.  They  are  gradually  extending  their  control  over  the  inter- 
national relations  of  the  state ;  and,  by  means  of  their  power  over 
the  ministry  or  over  finances,  act  as  a  check  on  this,  the  most 
important  surviving  field  of  executive  authority. 

4.  They  exercise  many  powers  not  purely  legislative.    In  decid- 
ing contested  elections,  trying  their  own  members,  or  impeaching 
other  officials,  they  exercise  judicial  powers.     In  appointing  or 
sharing  in  the  appointment  of  officials,  regulating  minor  executive 
offices,  appointing  commissions,  and  passing  private  legislation, 
they  enter  largely  into  administration. 

At  the  present  time  the  former  confidence  in  legislative  bodies 
is  somewhat  declining.  On  the  one  hand,  commissions  of  experts 
are  being  created  to  deal  with  problems  requiring  more  specific 
knowledge  than  a  large  body  of  legislators  is  likely  to  possess ;  on 
the  other,  the  people,  by  initiative,  referendum,  and  by  conventions 
for  the  creation  of  constitutions,  are  extending  their  authority  over 
the  field  of  legislation.  Side  by  side  with  these  processes  goes  an 
extension  of  the  sphere  into  which  legislation  is  entering,  the  com- 
plex life  of  modern  society  demanding  wider  collective  activity  and 
more  detailed  regulation. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XIX 

REFERENCES 

EVOLUTION  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE 

1.  THE  EXECUTIVE  HEAD 

2.  THE  EXECUTIVE  COUNCIL 

3.  THE  CABINET 

4.  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE 

THE  EXECUTIVE  HEAD 

1.  AS  TO  METHOD  OF  CHOICE  AND  TENURE  OF  OFFICE 

2.  AS  TO  ACTUAL  POWER 

EXECUTIVE  COUNCILS 

1.  IN  ENGLAND 

2.  IN  FRANCE 

3.  IN  GERMANY 

4.  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

HEADS  OF  DEPARTMENTS 

1.  ORGANIZATION 

a.  In  England 

b.  In  France 

c.  In  Germany 

d.  In  the  United  States 

2.  FUNCTIONS 

a.  Appointment  and  removal 

b.  Direction  and  supervision 

c.  Ordinances  and  special  acts 
THE  CIVIL  SERVICE 

FUNCTIONS  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE 

1.  GENERAL  NATURE 

a.  Political 

b.  Administrative 

2.  FUNCTIONS  OF  EXECUTIVE  HEADS 

a.  Diplomatic 

b.  Legislative 

c.  Military 

d.  Administrative 

e.  Judicial 

254 


CHAPTER  XIX 

THE  EXECUTIVE 

REFERENCES 

BODLEY,  J.  E.  C.  France,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  II,  chap,  ii 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  185-319 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  chap,  vii 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  48-160;  Vol.  II, 

pp.  101-134 

HART,  A.  B.  Actual  Government,  chaps,  xv,  xvi 
LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  Part  II,  chap,  iii 
LOWELL,  A.  L.  Governments  and    Parties  in  Continental    Europe,  Vol.  I,  pp. 

26-68,  273-280 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  The  Government  of  England,  Vol.  I,  chaps,  i-viii 
McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  Part  IV 
MASON,  E.  C.  The  Veto  Power 

MEDLEY,  D.  J.  English  Constitutional  History,  chap,  ii 
SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chap,  xxi 
STATESMAN'S  YEAR-BOOK 
WILSON,  W.  The  State,  pp.  224-230,  256,  268-271,  378-388,  542-550 

107.  Evolution  of  the  executive.  In  its  broadest  sense  the 
executive  department  consists  of  all  governmental  officials  except 
those  acting  in  a  legislative  or  judicial  capacity.  It  thus  includes 
the  entire  staff  of  officials  engaged  in  administration,  from  the  exec- 
utive head  to  the  humblest  department  clerk,  —  postmasters,  com- 
missioners, revenue  officers,  and  even  the  army  and  navy  coming 
within  this  classification.  Numerically  this  branch  of  government 
far  outnumbers  the  others  combined  ;  in  the  federal  government  of 
the  United  States  the  legislature  and  judiciary  comprise  less  than 
fourteen  thousand  men,  but  the  executive  officials  and  employees 
number  almost  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand. 

However,  since  in  administration  there  is  need  for  prompt  action 
and  consistent  policy,  executive  authority,  in  practically  all  states, 
tends  to  concentrate  in  a  single  head  or  in  a  small  group  of  men. 
The  advantages  of  numbers  in  legislation,  where  deliberation  and 
caution  are  essential,  become  dangers  when  energetic  action  is 


256          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

needed ;  hence  political  experience  is  decidedly  favorable  to  a 
single-headed  executive.  To  this  leader  of  administration,  some- 
times including  the  chiefs  of  departments  under  him,  the  term 
"  executive  "  is  specifically  applied. 

In  the  evolution  of  governmental  functions  the  executive  repre- 
sents, in  the  main,  the  surviving  powers  of  the  original  organs 
of  the  state.  Chief^and  council  in  primitive  times  performed  all 
governmental  "cfuties.  Gradually,  as  the  state  developed,  division 
of  labor  in  governing  became  necessary.  First,  the  religious  organ- 
ization differentiated  ;  later  a  distinction  was  made  between  judicial 
duties  and  other  powers  of  administration,  and  a  special  set  of 
officials,  more  or  less  correlated  and  more  or  less  free  from  execu- 
tive control,  formed  the  judicial  department.  Still  later  the  coun- 
cil, because  of  its  expanding  deliberative  powers,  developed  into  a 
lawmaking  organ.  This  resulted  not  only  in  the  idea  that  new  law 
might  be  created,  but  also  in  widening  the  basis  of  authority  until, 
in  modern  democratic  states,  the  entire  electorate  shares  in  creating 
law  and  in  choosing  officials. 

"  The  ancient  powers  of  the  executive,  therefore,  once  so  enor- 
mous, have  been  steadily  reduced  in  scope  by  transfers  of  power  to 
the  church,  the  judiciary,  the  lawmaking  body,  and  the  electorate. 
The  residue  of  powers  is  still  centered  in  the  executive  department, 
but  in  place  of  one  great  council  administering  all  such  powers, 
there  have  been  formed  numerous  subordinate  departments,  unified 
in  the  cabinet  and  under  the  authority  of  the  head  of  the  state,  but 
differentiated  in  function.  These  administrative  departments  bear 
different  names  in  different  states  and  are  not  always  separated  on 
quite  the  same  lines.  Broadly  speaking,  however,  there  will  be 
departments  to  regulate  international  relationships,  such  as  war  and 
diplomacy ;  to  administer  colonial  possessions,  if  any,  and  state 
monopolies  such  as  the  postal  service,  railways,  telegraphs,  and 
mines;  and  to  regulate  important  divisions  of  economic  life,  such 
as  commerce,  agriculture,  and  manufacturing.  There  will  be  depart- 
ments also  for  the  regulation  and  support  of  religion,  education, 
and  administrative  judicial  business,  for  the  management  of  public 
finance,  and  for  the  supervision  or  control  of  local  administration." l 

1  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  p.  159. 


THE  EXECUTIVE  257 

The  executive  department  therefore  consists  of : 

1.  The  executive  head,  whose  accession,  tenure,  powers,  and 
relation  to  other  departments  differ  in  different  states. 

2.  The  executive  council,  more  or  less  distinct  from  the  law- 
making  body  that  has  absorbed  many  of  its  powers. 

3.  The  cabinet,  or  heads  of  the  great  departments  of  adminis- 
tration, forming  more  or  less  of  a  unit,  and  standing,  in  different 
states,  in  widely  divergent  relations  to  the  executive  head  and  to 
the  legislature.  -V 

4.  The  civil  service,  of  the  numerous  subordinate  officials  in  the 
administrative  departments,  whose  selection,  tenure,  and  organiza- 
tion form  one  of  the  leading  problems  of  modern  politics. 

108.  The  executive  head.vlh  the  beginnings  of  political  organ- 
ization authority  was  centered  in  a  group  of  men,  among  whom, 
because  of  age  or  wisdom  or  personal  prowess,  a  leader  arose. 
This  position  might  be  attained  by  birth,  by  popular  choice,  or 
by  force,  and  was  usually  supported  by  the  idea  of  divine  right 
inherent  in  the  patriarchal  system.  The  natural  desire  to  perpet- 
uate power  in  the  same  family,  aided  by  the  close  organization  of 
the  patriarchal  group,  led  often  A  Jiereditary  rule.  Thus  an  auto- 
cratic monarch,  supported  by  divine  sanction  and  surrounded  by  a 
group  of  advisers,  that  similarly  formed  a  hereditary  nobility  and 
priesthood,  was  the  usual  organization  under  which  the  earliest 
states  emerged.  While  in  theory  the  power  of  such  a  ruler  was 
absolute,  in  reality  his  actions  were  limited  by  custom,  religion,  and 
ceremony,  and  by  the  influences  and  intrigues  that  permeated  his 
court.  The  development  of  monarchy  has  been  characterized  by 
the  placing  of  numerous  checks  on  the  autocratic  powers  of  the 
ruler  and  by  a  transfer  of  many  of  his  functions  to  other  organs ; 
at  the  same  time  his  authority  has  been  made  more  definite  and 
unhindered  in  such  powers  as  he  retained.  In  some  states,  espe- 
cially those  of  comparatively  recent  origin,  the  hereditary  ruler  has 
been  replaced  by  an  executive  head  chosen  by  some  form  of  election. 

At  the  present  time  all  types  of  executive  headship  may  be 
observed.  The  native  peoples  of  Africa  are  still  governed  by  tribal 
chiefs.  Autocratic  monarchs  supported  by  divine  sanction  are 
found  in  Japan  and  Turkey,  China,  Russia,  Austria,  Hungary, 


258          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

and  Germany  have  replaced  hereditary  by  elective  executives,  while 
Great  Britain  has  developed  constitutional  monarchy  to  the  point 
of  making  her  king  a  ruler  in  name  only.  Similar  differences  in 
real  power  characterize  the  executive  heads  in  those  states  that  have 
replaced  heredity  by  election.  The  president  of  Mexico  is  in  reality 
an  autocratic  monarch ;  the  president  of  the  United  States,  though 
limited  by  the  Constitution  to  the  exercise  of  delegated  functions, 
is  a  most  powerful  official.  The  French  president  in  practice  exer- 
cises but  a  few  nominal  powers,  and  the  president  of  Switzerland 
is  merely  the  chairman  of  an  executive  committee  acting  under  the 
control  of  the  legislature. 

In  general,  two  broad  lines  of  classification  characterize  executive 
headship  in  modern  states  : 

I .  As  to  method  of  choice  and  tenure  of  office.  Here  the  dis- 
tinction is  between  hereditary  and  elective  executives.  In  most 
European  and  Asiatic  states  the  executive  head  enjoys  a  lifelong 
tenure,  which,  on  his  death,  passes  by  some  form  of  heredity  to  his 
heir.  Such  a  system  is  a  historical  product  resulting  from  the 
political  evolution  of  the  state.  In  modern  democratic  states  "  it 
implies  the  existence  of  a  royal  house  whose  foundation  reaches  far 
back  of  the  revolution  which  changed  the  state  from  its  monarchic 
or  aristocratic  to  its  democratic  form.  'It  implies  that  that  house 
has  accommodated  itself  to  the  spirit  of  the  revolution,  —  has,  in  fact, 
placed  itself  at  the  head  of  the  revolution  and  brought  it  to  its 
consummation ;  has  retained  its  hold  upon  the  people ;  has  kept, 
and  still  keeps  attached  to  itself,  the  most  capable  personalities  of 
the  state,  the  natural  leaders  of  the  people  ;  is  content  to  surrender 
sovereignty  and  retain  a  limited  governmental  power  only,  and,  in 
the  exercise  of  this  power,  follows  always  a  liberal  and  popular 
policy."  1  While  such  a  system  is  repugnant  to  democratic  ideas  in 
America,  it  has  certain  advantages.  It  gives  stability  and  continuity 
to  political  institutions  and  creates  a  respect  for  authority  and  law. 
It  contributes  a  certain  prestige  to  international  dealings,  and,  by 
its  permanence  and  traditions,  tends  to  create  a  sense  of  responsi- 
bility and  dignity  in  the  heads  of  government  and  to  maintain  a 
stable  and  efficient  civil  service. 

1  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  p.  308. 


THE  EXECUTIVE  259 

England  and  Italy  are  the  most  important  modern  states  with 
hereditary  executives,  and  the  difference  between  the  English  and 
the  continental  law  of  succession  is  significant.  The  English  law, 
which  admits  women  to  the  succession,  and  which  does  not  require 
princely  marriages  for  royal  princesses,  makes  possible  frequent 
changes  in  the  royal  house  and  permits  the  infusion  of  unroyal 
blood.  These  tend  to  weaken  reverence  for  the  monarch  and  help 
to  explain  the  unimportant  powers  of  the  English  king  as  com- 
pared with  those  of  rulers  of  the  states  of  continental  Europe, 
many  of  which  had  until  recently  hereditary  executives  with  large 
and  responsible  powers  in  government. 

The  American  republics,  and  France  and  Switzerland  in  Europe, 
have  elected  executives,  although  the  methods  of  election  differ. 
Peru,  Brazil,  and  Bolivia  elect  their  presidents  by  direct  popular 
vote  ;  Mexico,  the  Argentine  Republic,  and  Chile  choose  their  presi- 
dents by  indirect  election.  The  president  of  the  United  States  is 
chosen  indirectly,  by  means  of  an  electoral  college  in  which  each 
commonwealth  is  represented  by  as  many  electors  as  it  has  mem- 
bers in  Congress.  This  system  was  intended  to  secure  able  men 
by  giving  the  power  of  choice  to  a  specially  selected  body.  In 
actual  practice,  by  means  of  the  system  of  nomination  worked  out 
by  political  parties,  and  by  the  popular  election  of  presidential 
electors,  the  president  is  really  chosen  by  direct  popular  vote.  The 
French  president  is  elected  by  the  two  houses  of  the  legislature 
sitting  together  as  a  National  Assembly.  This  provision  was  placed 
in  the  French  constitution  because  of  the  fear  that  a  president  pro- 
ceeding from  the  people  would  become  too  powerful.  Experience 
with'  Napoleon  I,  and,  under  the  constitution  of  1848,  with  Napo- 
leon III,  showed  the  existence  of  such  a  danger.  The  president 
of  Switzerland  is  chosen  by  the  federal  legislature  from  among  the 
seven  councilors  that  have  charge  of  the  administrative  department. 

In  the  case  of  elected  executives  the  term  of  office  and  the  ques- 
tion of  reeligibility  are  important.  The  desire  to  make  the  chief 
executive  responsible,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  the  people  naturally 
results  in  comparatively  short  terms  and  infrequent  reelections. 
The  term  of  the  Swiss  president  is  one  year,  and  he  is  not  im- 
mediately reeligible  ;  in  practice  the  vice  president  succeeds.  The 


260          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

presidents  of  the  American  republics  hold  office  for  terms  of  four 
to  six  years,  and  in  most  cases  are  not  reeligible.  The  president 
of  Mexico,  who,  from  1884  to  1911,  was  continuously  reflected  at 
the  expiration  of  each  four-year  term,  was  an  exception.  The  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  does  not  prohibit  reelection,  but  the 
precedent,  set  by  Washington,  of  refusing  a  third  term  is  strongly 
supported  by  public  opinion.  The  French  president  is  elected  for 
seven  years  and  is  reeligible. 

Executive  heads  usually  enjoy  personal  irresponsibility  while  in 
office.  Hereditary  executives  are  ordinarily  exempt  from  removal, 
although  the  British  Parliament  has  taken  unto  itself  the  power  to 
depose  a  monarch  and  to  change  the  royal  line.  The  national 
assembly  of  the  German  republic  may,  by  a  two-thirds  vote, 
suspend  the  president,  or  he  may  be  removed  by  a  majority  vote 
of  the  people.  Some  method  of  removing  elected  presidents  by 
impeachment  is  usually  provided,  the  lower  house  of  the  legisla- 
ture making  the  arraignment  before  the  upper  house  acting  as 
a  court.  In  case  of  the  removal  or  death  of  an  elected  executive 
some  provision  for  succession  is  necessary.  In  the  United  States 
the  vice  president  succeeds,  followed  by  the  members  of  the 
cabinet  in  a  prescribed  order.  In  France  the  council  of  ministers 
is  temporarily  invested  with  executive  powers,  pending  the  election 
of  a  new  president. 

2.  As  to  actual  power.  Here  the  distinction  is  between  nomi- 
nal and  actual  executives  and  depends  largely  upon  the  relation 
of  executive  to  legislature.  The  two  great  types  of  govern- 
ment—  parliamentary  or  cabinet,  and  nonparliamentary  or  presi- 
dential—  under  which  modern  states  may  be  classified,  have 
already  been  discussed1  and  need  be  only  briefly  referred  to. 
In  the  former  the  executive  head  is  a  nominal  ruler,  the  real 
executive  being  the  cabinet,  a  group  of  men  whose  tenure  of 
office  is  dependent  upon  the  will  of  the  legislature.  In  the 
latter  the  tenure  of  the  executive  head  is  independent  of  the 
legislature,  and  certain  powers  are  exercised  by  him  without 
regard  to  legislative  wishes. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  the  distinction  between  hereditary 
1  See  sections  80,  81,  97. 


THE  EXECUTIVE  261 

and  elected  executives  and  between  nominal  and  actual  executives 
is  a  cross  classification.  The  hereditary  English  king  and  the 
elected  French  president  are  nominal  executives,  both  states 
having  cabinets  that  are  responsible  to  their  legislatures  and  that 
exercise  the  real  powers  of  administration.  The  long  term  and 
reeligibility  of  the  French  president  are  therefore  of  little  signifi- 
cance. On  the  other  hand,  the  hereditary  Japanese  emperor  and 
the  elected  American  president  are  actual  executives  exercising 
large  and  independent  powers.  In  most  cases,  however,  an  elected 
executive  is  the  real  head  of  the  state,  while  a  hereditary  monarch, 
except  in  those  states  whose  government  is  still  despotic,  is  a 
nominal  ruler,  though  often  exercising  considerable  influence 
because  of  the  traditional  respect  for  the  royal  office. 

109.  Executive  councils.  The  development  of  the  executive 
branch  of  government  has  usually  been  marked  by  the  rise  of 
some  form  of  council,  which,  at  first  serving  in  an  advisory 
capacity,  often  secured  considerable  control  over  the  actions  of 
the  executive  head  and  exercised  important  administrative  func- 
tions in  its  own  right.  The  more  recent  formation  of  representa- 
tive legislative  bodies  has  somewhat  diminished  the  importance  of 
such  councils,  often,  in  fact,  partially  absorbing  their  organization 
as  well  as  their  functions.  Even  in  these  cases  important  survivals 
of  their  administrative,  as  distinguished  from  their  legislative, 
powers  may  be  traced.  A  brief  survey  of  executive  councils  in 
leading  modern  states  follows  : 1 

i .  England.  While  the  British  Parliament,  through  its  control 
of  finance,  was  developing  legislative  powers,  a  council,  growing 
out  of  the  old  Curia  Regis,  was  aiding  the  crown  in  its  adminis- 
trative and  judicial  duties.  This  body,  to  which  the  name  Privy 
Council  was  later  applied,  grew  under  weak  kings  until  it  exerted 
a  considerable  control  over  the  crown  and  exercised  wide  legis- 
lative, judicial,  and  administrative  functions.  At  present  the  Privy 
Council  consists  of  about  two  hundred  persons  appointed  by  the 
crown,  and  includes  the  heads  of  the  various  departments,  heads 
of  departments  under  preceding  administrations,  certain  important 
governmental  and  ecclesiastical  officials,  and  a  number  of  members 

1  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  II,  Div.  II, 


262          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

of  the  peerage.  Such  members  as  are  invited  by  the  crown  meet 
once  in  three  or  four  weeks,  the  clerk  and  six  members  forming  a 
quorum.  The  Privy  Council  has  lost  most  of  its  judicial  powers ; 
its  legislative  functions  have  been  taken  over  by  Parliament,  and 
its  administrative  duties  are  now  largely  exercised  by  a  small  group 
of  its  members  known  as  the  cabinet.  It  still  retains  its  power  of 
advising  the  crown  in  issuing  ordinances,  known  accordingly  in 
England  as  "orders  in  council";  its  approval  is  necessary  for 
the  validity  of  ordinances  issued  by  local  authorities,  and  its  mem- 
bers alone  have  the  legal  right  to  advise  the  crown.  Accordingly 
the  powerful  cabinet,  the  real  executive  in  England,  has  no  legal 
existence  and  can  exercise  no  legal  powers  except  as  a  part  of 
the  Privy  Council.  Several  administrative  and  judicial  boards, 
now  more  or  less  independent,  have  had  their  origin  in  this  body. 

2.  France.    The  executive  council  in  France  has  had  a  brilliant 
history.    During  the  Absolute  Monarchy  it  was  almost  the  only 
guarantee  of  good  government,  and  under  the  Empires  it  exercised 
large  legislative  powers  and  accomplished  an  enormous  amount  of 
work.    When  legislative  bodies  were  established  in  the  republics, 
the  council  was  limited  to  advisory  executive  duties.    The  present 
Council  of  State  consists  of  one  hundred  and  sixteen  members, 
some  of  whom  are  appointed  by  the  president,  others  being  chosen 
by  competitive  examination.    It  is  divided  into  four  administrative 
sections,  each  advising  certain  administrative  departments  ;  and 
one  judicial  section,  which  acts  as  an  administrative  court.    Mem- 
bers of  the  cabinet  may  attend  the  general  assemblies  of  the 
council  and  vote  on  matters  concerning  their  departments.    The 
executive  or  the  legislature  may  send  proposed  bills  to  the  council 
for  advice ;  its  advice  must  be  asked  in  the  case  of  ordinances ; 
and  the  president  and  ministers  usually  submit  to  the  council  ques- 
tions which  are  valuable  as  offering  precedents  for  future  action. 
While  the  government  is  not  bound  by  its  advice,  an  enormous 
number  of  matters,  usually  of   a   legal  or   political   nature,    are 
submitted  to  it. 

3.  Germany.    The  German  Reichsrat  is  not  only  a  branch  of 
the  legislature  but  also  an  executive  council  with  extensive  func- 
tions.   It  participates  in  important  appointments,  and  it  must  be 


THE  EXECUTIVE  263 

kept  informed  by  the  national  administrative  departments  of  the 
conduct  of  national  business.  Its  consent  is  required  if  the  cabi- 
net wishes  to  assign  the  execution  of  national  laws  to  the  state 
authorities.  Administrative  regulations  issued  by  the  cabinet  con- 
cerning the  construction,  operation,  and  traffic  of  railways  must 
also  receive  the  approval  of  the  Reichsrat. 

4.  The  United  States.  In  the  colonies  there  were  usually  gov- 
ernors' councils  whose  consent  was  necessary  for  the  validity  of 
certain  of  the  governors'  acts ;  and  in  the  commonwealths  of 
Maine,  Massachusetts,  and  New  Hampshire  there  are  still  gov- 
ernors' councils,  whose  consent  is  necessary  for  the  governors' 
appointments.  In  the  national  government,  the  Senate,  acting 
as  an  executive  council  separate  from  the  House,  and  usually  in 
secret  session,  exercises  a  control  over  two  important  powers  of 
the  president.  Its  consent  is  necessary  for  the  most  important 
appointments  ;  and  it  must,  by  a  two-thirds  majority,  approve  all 
treaties  before  they  shall  be  effective. 

110.  Heads  of  departments.  As  the  business  of  the  state  be- 
came more  complex,  five  well-developed  branches  of  administration 
arose,  —  foreign,  military,  judicial,  financial,  and  internal  affairs. 
Other  branches  were  often  formed  by  subdividing  these,  as  in  the 
case  of  naval  affairs,  formerly  a  part  of  the  military  department ; 
or  departments  for  colonies,  agriculture,  and  commerce,  which  are 
now  important  enough  for  separate  administration.  Sometimes  a 
geographical  basis  of  division  was  followed,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
British  Secretary  of  State  for  India  or  the  British  Secretary  for 
Scotland.  All  states,  accordingly,  have  numerous  departments, 
each  devoting  itself  to  some  particular  administrative  activity  ;  and 
it  has  come  to  be  a  recognized  political  principle  that  each  of 
these  fundamental  departments  of  administration  should  be  under 
the  authority  of  a  single  head.  Such  heads  of  departments,  often 
called  ministers,  as  a  body  form  the  cabinet ;  and  their  relation  to 
executive  and  legislature,  and  their  functions,  demand  consideration. 

The  relation  of  the  cabinet  to  the  other  departments  of  govern- 
ment, depending  in  the  main  on  the  term  and  tenure  of  the  heads 
of  departments,  may  be  best  viewed  by  a  brief  summary  of  the 
organization  of  the  cabinet  in  leading  modern  states. 


264          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

1.  England.    The  English  cabinet  has  had  a  gradual  develop- 
ment, and  even  now  rests  on  custom  rather  than  on  law.    The 
king's  ministers  in  England,  as  elsewhere,  were  at  first  his  chosen 
advisers,  often  hostile  to  the  growing  powers  of  Parliament,  whose 
only  control  over  them  was  that  of  impeachment.    As  the  king's 
advisers,  or  Privy  Council,  as  they  were  called,  increased  in  num- 
bers, a  smaller  group,  or  "  cabinet,"  took  over  the  most  important 
duties.    When  Parliament,  after  the  overthrow  of  the  Stuarts,  was 
recognized  as  supreme,  William  III,  to  secure  its  support,  chose 
his  ministers  from  its  majority  party.    At  first  these  men  did  not 
act  as  a  body,  neither  did  they  resign  if  defeated ;  both  of  these 
principles  have  developed  since  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury.   At  present  the  British  cabinet  consists  of  from  fifteen  to 
twenty  men,  appointed  by  the  crown  on  the  nomination  of  one  of 
their  number,  who  is  first  chosen  as  prime  minister.    The  prime 
minister  is  the  leader  of  the  party  in  power  in  the  House  of 
Commons,   and  usually  holds   the  office  of    First   Lord  of  the 
Treasury,  partly  because  its  nominal  duties  give  him  opportunity 
to  devote  himself  to  questions  of  general  policy,  and  partly  because 
of  its  extensive  powers  of  appointment.    The   members  of  the 
cabinet,  all  of  the  same  party  as  the  prime  minister,  are  usually 
members  of  one  or  other  of  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  where 
they  take  an  active  part ;  at  the  same  time  they  serve  as  heads  of 
the  most  important  departments  of  administration.    They  deter- 
mine their  policy  in  secret  session  and  act  as  a  unit.    If  defeated 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  they  resign  collectively ;  or,  if  they 
believe  that  their  policy  will  be  supported  by  the  people  at  large, 
they  require  the  crown  to  dissolve  Parliament  and  they  stake  their 
tenure  on  the   outcome  of  the  following    election.    The    prime 
minister  is  therefore  the  actual  executive  in  England.    He  con- 
trols the  other  heads  of  departments,  and,  in  turn,  is  dependent 
upon  the  legislature,  because  of  the  necessity  of  maintaining  a 
favorable  majority  in  the  House  of  Commons. 

2.  France.    Nominally,  the  president  in  France  appoints  and 
dismisses  the  ministers.    Actually,  the  ministers  are  controlled  by 
the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  to  which  they  are  collectively  respon- 
sible for  the  general  policy  of  the  administration  and  individually 


THE  EXECUTIVE  265 

responsible  for  their  own  personal  acts.1  As  an  administrative 
council,  the  ministers  exercise  supervision  over  the  administration 
of  the  laws  and  give  unity  to  the  affairs  of  state ;  and  every  act  of 
the  president  must  be  countersigned  by  the  minister  of  the  depart- 
ment concerned.  The  ministers  are  usually  members  of  the  legis- 
lature and  have  the  right  to  speak  before  it  whenever  they  so 
desire.  When  the  support  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  is  lost,  the 
ministers  resign ;  and  any  individual  minister  may  be  forced  out 
of  office  if  a  vote  is  taken  expressing  lack  of  confidence.  This  is 
frequently  done  after  an  interpellation,  by  which  the  minister  is 
compelled  to  answer  before  the  Chamber  questions  concerning  the 
policy  of  his  department.  Accordingly,  the  chief  of  the  council 
of  ministers,  a  statesman  who  commands  the  confidence  of  the 
Chamber  of  Deputies,  and  who  is  usually  minister  of  the  interior, 
is  the  real  head  of  the  administration.  On  his  recommendation 
the  other  ministers  are  appointed,  and  he  can  force  them  out  of 
office  if  dissatisfied  with  their  actions.  The  position  of  the  French 
president  is  therefore  very  difficult.  Elected  by  the  legislature  for 
a  definite  term,  he  has  apparently  large  powers ;  but  the  fact  that 
all  his  acts  must  be  approved  by  ministers  responsible,  not  to  him, 
but  to  a  Chamber  of  Deputies,  often  controlled  by  parties  other 
than  that  to  which  the  president  belongs,  makes  his  authority 
nominal.  The  attempt  of  France  to  combine  parliamentary  and 
presidential  government  is  a  novelty  in  political  science. 

3.  Germany.  In  the  former  German  Empire  the  chancellor, 
appointed  by  the  emperor  and  responsible  to  him  alone,  was  the 
head  of  the  administration,  and  all  other  ministers  were  his  sub- 
ordinates. In  the  new  republic  the  working  executive  is  a  group 
of  ministers,  appointed  by  the  president,  but  responsible  to  the 
national  assembly  for  all  the  acts  of  the  government.  Like  Great 
Britain  and  France,  Germany  has  adopted  the  cabinet  system  of 
government,  but  while  in  the  former  countries  the  maintenance 
of  harmonious  relations  between  ministers  and  legislative  majority 
is  entirely  a  matter  of  custom,  in  Germany  the  constitution  pro- 
vides that  ''the  national  chancellor  and  the  national  ministers 
require  for  the  administration  of  their  offices  the  confidence  of 
1  Loi  constitutionnelle  du  25  fevrier,  1875,  Art.  6,  sec.  I. 


266          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  national  assembly ;  each  of  them  must  resign  if  the  national 
assembly  by  formal  resolution  withdraws  its  confidence."  Ministers 
may  be  present  at  meetings  of  the  national  assembly,  may  take  part 
in  the  proceedings  of  the  national  council,  and  may  introduce  bills. 
The  national  assembly  may  impeach  ministers  before  the  supreme 
judicial  court  for  violation  of  the  constitution  or  of  the  laws. 

4.  The  United  States.  The  president,  with  the  approval  of  the 
Senate,  appoints  and,  on  his  own  initiative,  removes  the  heads  of 
departments,  whose  responsibility  is  therefore  merged  in  that  of 
the  president.  They  have  no  collegiate  existence  under  the  Con- 
stitution, and  even  in  administering  their  departments  are  subordi- 
nate to  the  president.  The  president  is  not  obliged  to  take  their 
advice,  and  the  resignation  or  removal  of  one  member  does  not 
necessarily  affect  the  others.  By  law  they  are  not  allowed  to  hold 
seats  in  Congress,  and  by  custom  they  are  not  permitted  to  speak 
before  it.  Accordingly  the  president  is  the  only  bond  uniting  the 
executive  departments.  What  is  called  the  cabinet  is  a  voluntary 
association  of  the  heads  of  departments,  whose  opinions  the  pres- 
ident may  require  but  need  not  accept,  and  whose  tenure  is  de- 
pendent upon  his  will.  The  legislature,  except  in  last  resort  by 
impeachment,  exercises  no  control  over  their  tenure  of  office ; 
although,  by  detailed  statutory  provisions  prescribing  their  fun- 
damental activities,  it  exercises  considerable  control  over  their 
functions. 

The  functions  of  the  heads  of  departments,  in  addition  to  their 
political  position  as  leaders  in  formulating  the  policy  of  govern- 
ment, and  as  advisers  of  the  executive  and  agents  for  the  dis- 
charge of  his  powers,  may  be  summed  up  under  the  following 
heads. x 

I.  Appointment  and  removal.  Heads  of  departments  usually 
have  the  right  to  appoint  many  of  the  subordinate  officials  of  their 
departments.  Sometimes  the  most  important  subordinates  are 
appointed  by  the  executive  head,  and  laws  frequently  regulate 
the  conditions  and  qualifications  for  appointment.  The  power  of 
removal  usually  accompanies  the  power  of  appointment,  although 
in  Germany  office  is  legally  recognized  as  a  vested  right  and 
1  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  146-158. 


THE  EXECUTIVE  267 

cannot  be  taken  away  except  on   conviction  of  crime  or  after  a 
trial  before  a  disciplinary  court. 

2.  Direction    and  supervision.    States   differ  in   the  authority 
which  heads  of  departments  may  exercise  over  the  actions  of  their 
subordinates.    In  England  and  the  United  States  this  supervisory 
power  has  usually  been  small,  especially  in  the  case  of  central  over 
local  officials.    In  Germany  and  France  heads  of  departments  have 
always  exercised  considerable  control  over  their  subordinates.    At 
the  present  time  all  these  states  show  tendencies  toward  compro- 
mise.   England  and  the  United  States  are  extending  the  directive 
powers  of  heads  of  departments,  while  France  and  Germany  are 
giving  larger  discretionary  powers  to  subordinate  officials. 

3.  Ordinances  and  special  acts.    In  all  states  heads  of  depart- 
ments exercise  a  delegated  ordinance  power,  filling  out  by  general 
orders  the  details  of  administrative  law.    In  addition  many  special 
acts  must  be  performed  ;  contracts  must  be  made  and  decisions  on 
special  questions  given.  Against  special  acts  appeals  may  be  taken  to 
the  courts  in  England  and  the  United  States ;  in  France  the  Council 
of  State  is  the  final  authority  for  both  special  and  general  orders. 

111.  The  civil  service.  In  its  broadest  sense  the  executive 
department  includes  the  general  body  of  officials  serving  under  the 
heads  of  the  various  administrative  departments  and  known  col- 
lectively as  the  civil  service.  These  are  distinguished  on  the  one 
hand  from  legislative  and  judicial  officers,  and  on  the  other  from 
members  of  the  army  and  navy,  who  are  under  special  military 
and  naval  organization  and  rule.  As  to  functions  the  civil  service 
may  be  broadly  divided  into  : 

1 .  Those  who  have  discretionary  powers,  for  example,  the  heads 
of  the  more  important  subdivisions  of  administration. 

2.  Those  who  perform  their  duties  under  definite  directions, 
for  example,  minor  officials  and  clerical  employees. 

More  important  is  their  relation  to  the  heads  of  government, 
and  the  question  of  their  selection,  removal,  and  tenure.  In  most 
states  executive  officials  form  a  hierarchy,  subordinates  being 
appointed  by  the  head  of  the  department  or  by  persons  respon- 
sible to  him.  This  secures  unity  of  purpose  and  prompt,  vigorous 
action.  The  commonwealths  of  the  United  States  are,  however, 


268          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

an  exception  to  this  rule,  since,  in  them,  subordinate  officials  and 
even  some  heads  of  departments  are  elected  by  the  people  and 
are  not  directly  responsible  to  any  superior  official.  Besides,  nu- 
merous boards  and  commissions  are  created  and  given  delegated 
powers  with  little  provision  for  coordination  or  supervision.  While 
such  a  system  works  fairly  well  in  the  American  commonwealths, 
because  their  position  in  the  Union  and  the  detailed  provisions 
of  their  constitutions  permit  but  little  exercise  of  discretionary 
powers,  the  present  tendency  is  toward  centralization  and  increas- 
ing executive  control. 

In  carrying  on  administration  in  local  districts  two  general 
systems  are  in  use.  Sometimes,  as  in  the  United  States  federal 
government,  the  system  is  highly  centralized.  National  officials, 
such  as  collectors,  customs  officials,  Indian  agents,  etc.,  each  act- 
ing under  the  direction  of  the  head  of  his  department,  are  placed 
in  the  various  local  districts  of  administration.  In  other  cases,  as 
in  the  federal  government  of  Germany  and  in  the  American  com- 
monwealths, officials  of  local  administration  are  given  certain  duties 
as  agents  of  the  superior  government.  On  the  continent,  when 
such  a  system  is  in  use,  the  local  officers  are  frequently  appointed 
by  the  central  government  and  act  under  its  control.  In  England 
and  the  United  States  local  units  usually  choose  their  own  officials, 
and  the  control  of  the  central  authority  over  such  officials,  even 
when  acting  as  its  agents,  is  small. 

The  members  of  the  civil  service  may  hold  office  by  hereditary 
right,  by  election,  either  direct  or  indirect,  or  by  appointment.  If 
appointed,  they  may  be  chosen  at  the  will  of  the  appointing  official 
or  in  accord  with  certain  regulations,  usually  including  competitive 
tests  and  assignment  to  office  on  the  basis  of  merit.  Office  may 
be  held  for  life,  for  an  indefinite  term  during  good  behavior,  or 
for  a  long  or  short  term  of  definite  length.  In  most  states  the 
civil  service  is  permanent  in  tenure,  and,  except  for  the  heads  of 
departments,  is  not  affected  by  changes  in  government  caused  by 
the  rise  or  fall  of  administrations.  Such  a  system,  unless  it  degen- 
erates into  a  narrow  and  inefficient  bureaucracy,  emphasizing  the 
red  tape  of  routine  at  the  expense  of  larger  interests,  tends  toward 
efficiency  and  honesty  in  public  service. 


THE  EXECUTIVE  269 

In  the  United  States  the  civil-service  problem  has  been  one  of 
unusual  difficulty.  Except  for  a  few  officials,  such  as  the  federal 
judiciary,  who  hold  office  for  life,  the  greater  number  of  subordi- 
nate executive  officers  were  formerly  appointed  by  the  president 
or  by  the  heads  of  departments.  According  to  the  decisions  of 
the  courts,  the  power  of  dismissal  is  incident  to  the  power  of 
appointment,  and  while  this  power  was  exercised  very  sparingly 
during  the  first  forty  years  of  our  national  life,  the  act  of  1820, 
which  set  a  four-year  term  for  many  federal  officials,  and  the 
"  spoils  system  "  begun  by  Jackson  in  1829,  started  the  American 
practice  of  using  the  civil  service  as  a  means  of  rewarding  political 
followers.  The  abuses  growing  out  of  this  system  led  to  a  demand 
for  civil-service  reform,  and  the  Civil  Service  Act  of  1883, 
extended  by  later  acts  and  executive  orders,  provided  for  open 
competitive  examinations,  free  from  political  influence,  with  ap- 
pointment from  the  highest  grades.  The  greater  number  of 
administrative  positions  are  now  included  in  the  "classified  serv- 
ice," to  which  the  competitive-examination  method  applies,  and 
a  corresponding  increase  in  efficiency  and  many  improvements 
in  political  methods  are  claimed. 

112.  Functions  of  the  executive.  The  executive  department  of 
government  exercises  two  fairly  distinct  sets  of  functions. 

1 .  Political. *    These  include  the  relations  of  the  executive  to 
the  other  departments  of  government,  and   its  determination  of 
questions    of   general    policy,    both    external    and    internal.    The 
executive,  representing  the  unity  of  the  state,   "  conducts  diplo- 
matic negotiations,  commands  the  army  and  navy,  declares  war, 
makes  peace,  negotiates  treaties,   receives  and  sends  diplomatic 
embassies,  and  appoints  all  officials  who  assist  in  these  duties.   As 
representative  of  the  state  in  its  intercourse  with  its  subjects,  the 
executive  from  time  to  time  makes  announcements  of  policy,  in- 
spects the  workings  of  the  governmental  system,  and  makes  or 
recommends  improvements."  2 

2.  Administrative.    These  include  the  mass  of  business  details 
which  modern  government  demands.    The  executive  "  is  charged 

1  Called  "  governmental "  in  France. 

2  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  p.  147. 


270 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


with  providing  for  the  collective  needs  of  the  citizens  which  the 
initiative  of  individuals  or  associations  of  individuals  could  not  ad- 
equately satisfy ;  it  must  gather  together  the  resources  of  society 
both  in  men  and  money  in  order  that  society  may  continue  to  exist 
and  make  progress ;  it  must  play  the  part  of  the  man  of  business 
in  society  .  .  .  ;  must  maintain  order  and  further  the  general 
prosperity."  l  "  The  head  of  the  executive  is  also  head  of  the 
administration ;  as  such  he  appoints  its  officers,  organizes  its 
departments,  assigns  to  each  its  respective  functions,  and  oversees 
the  working  of  the  entire  administration ;  enforcing,  if  necessary, 
his  orders  and  the  law  of  the  land  by  means  of  the  war  and 
police  powers  placed  in  his  hands."  2 

This  distinction,  which  is  more  clearly  recognized  on  the  conti- 
nent, particularly  in  France,  than  in  England  or  the  United  States, 
is  important.  In  England  and  France,  where  political  powers  are 
in  the  hands  of  the  cabinet,  acting  under  the  control  of  the  legis- 
lature, the  powers  of  the  executive  head  are  largely  administrative. 
In  the  United  States  and  Germany  the  chief  executive  is  both  a 
political  authority  and  the  head  of  the  administration.  In  the  com- 
monwealths of  the  United  States  the  governor  is  merely  a  political 
chief,  and  administrative  powers  are  exercised  largely  by  govern- 
mental organs  independent  of  his  authority. 

The  various  functions  of  administration  have  already  been  sug- 
gested and  will  be  more  fully  developed  in  a  later  chapter.3  At 
present  attention  will  be  given  to  the  powers  exercised  by  executive 
heads  in  modern  states.  These,  while  differing  in  detail,  show 
marked  similarity  and  may  be  broadly  classified  under  the  following 
divisions : 

i.  Diplomatic.  These  include  the  negotiation  of  treaties,  the 
appointment  of  diplomatic  agents,  the  right  to  receive  or  refuse  to 
receive  the  diplomatic  agents  of  other  states,  and  to  wage  defensive 
war.  Certain  checks  on  the  unrestrained  exercise  of  these  powers 
by  the  executive  are  usually  included  in  modern  constitutions  or 
imposed  by  legislative  enactment. 

1  Aucoc,  Conferences  sur  1'administration,  etc.,  I,  78  ;    quoted  by  Goodnow, 
Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  p.  50. 

2  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  p.  148.  3  See  Chapter  XXV. 


THE  EXECUTIVE 


27I 


2.  Legislative.    These  include  the  assembling,  adjourning,  or 
dissolving  of  the  legislature,  the  right,  directly  or  indirectly,  to 
initiate  legislation,  frequently  some  form  of  veto  power,  and  the 
duty  of  promulgating  the  laws. 

3.  Military.   The  executive  head  is  usually  commander  in  chief 
of  the  military  and  naval  forces.    As  such  he  appoints  and  dis- 
misses officers,  establishes  and  supervises  martial  law,  and  in  time 
of  war  wields  immensely  increased  power. 

4.  Administrative.    In  civil  administration  the  executive  head 
has  large  powers  of  appointment  and  removal.    He  supervises  the 
execution  of  administrative  laws  and  usually  has  some  degree  of 
ordinance  power. 

5.  Judicial.    In  addition  to  the  appointing  of  judicial  officials, 
executive  heads  frequently  possess  the  power  to  issue  pardons 
and  reprieves. 

In  regard  to  the  above  functions  the  executive  heads  of  leading 
states  differ  less  than  in  their  tenure  or  in  their  relation  to  the 
legislature.  One  important  point  of  difference,  however,  must  be 
noted. J  The  residuary  powers  of  government  —  that  is,  those 
powers  not  forbidden  to  the  government  and  not  specifically  pro- 
vided for  —  are,  in  the  constitutional  system  of  the  United  States, 
left  in  the  commonwealth  legislatures ;  in  the  new  German  repub- 
lic and  in  France,  in  the  national  legislatures ;  and  in  England, 
in  the  crown.  Accordingly  the  ordinance  powers  of  the  presi- 
dent of  the  United  States,  the  president  of  Germany,  and  the 
president  of  France  are  specific  and  statutory,  limited  to  those 
things  over  which  they  have  been  given  a  delegated  authority.  In 
England  the  crown  has  a  general  ordinance  power  over  all  sub- 
jects not  regulated  by  statute  or  common  law.  While  the  other 
executives  may  act  only  when  specifically  permitted,  the  English 
executive  may  act  unless  specifically  forbidden.  This  is  a  valuable 
power  in  emergency,  and  enables  prompt  executive  action  without 
the  delay  incident  to  legislative  procedure ;  yet,  since  the  legisla- 
ture may  at  its  pleasure  further  limit  these  residuary  powers, 
arbitrary  executive  authority  is  prevented. 

1  Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  317-319. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XX 

REFERENCES 

EVOLUTION  OF  THE  JUDICIAL  DEPARTMENT 

1.  AS  TO  ORGANIZATION 

2.  AS  TO  THE  STATUS  OF  INDIVIDUALS  BEFORE  THE  LAW 

3.  AS  TO  PROCEDURE  AND  PUNISHMENT 

FUNCTIONS  AND  REQUISITES  OF  THE  JUDICIARY 

1.  FUNCTIONS 

2.  REQUISITES 

a.  Trained  in  the  law 

b.  Impartial 

RELATION  OF  JUDICIARY  TO  EXECUTIVE 

1.  EXECUTIVE  CONTROL  OVER  THE  JUDICIARY 

2.  JUDICIAL  POWERS  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE 

3-  JUDICIAL  CONTROL  OVER  THE  EXECUTIVE 

4.  ADMINISTRATIVE  COURTS 

RELATION  OF  JUDICIARY  TO  LEGISLATURE 

1.  LEGISLATIVE  CONTROL  OVER  THE  JUDICIARY 

2.  JUDICIAL  POWERS  OF  THE  LEGISLATURE 

3.  JUDICIAL  INFLUENCE  IN  LEGISLATION 

4.  DECLARING  ACTS  UNCONSTITUTIONAL 
ORGANIZATION  OF  THE  JUDICIARY 

1 .  IN  ENGLAND 

2.  IN  FRANCE 

3-    IN  GERMANY 

4.    IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

a.  Jurisdiction  of  the  federal  courts 


272 


CHAPTER  XX 

THE  JUDICIARY 

REFERENCES 

BALDWIN,  S.  E.  The  American  Judiciary 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  320-366 

CARSON,  H.  L.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States :  Its  History 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  chaps,  viii,  ix 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  144-262 

HART,  A.  B.  Actual  Government,  chap,  xvii 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  207-218 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  Essays  on  Government,  No.  Ill 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  The  Government  of  England,  Vol:  II,  chaps,  lix-lxii 

McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  Part  V 

MEDLEY,  D.  J.  English  Constitutional  History,  chap,  vii 

SIDGWICK,  H.   Elements  of  Politics,  chap,  xxiv 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 

WILSON,  W.  The  State,  pp.  244,  295-298,  397-^02,  535-542 

113.  Evolution  of  the  judicial  department.  The  development 
of  the  judicial  department  of  government  may  be  traced  along 
several  related,  yet  fairly  distinct,  channels. l 

i.  As  to  its  organization.  In  the  primitive  state  disputes  and 
breaches  of  custom  were  private  matters,  settled  by  compromise 
or  by  individual  or  family  vengeance.  The  state,  entering  as  the 
arbiter  of  custom,  later  became  the  creator  of  law,  the  adjudicator 
of  disputes,  and  the  prosecutor  and  punisher  of  offenses.  At  first 
the  judicial  function  was  not  differentiated  from  other  political 
functions,  and  was  exercised  by  the  executive  and  his  advisers, 
who,  in  addition  to  creating  and  administering  law,  decided  dis- 
putes and  punished  offenders.  As  political  business  increased  and 
personal  property  rights  became  more  complex,  special  officials, 
expert  in  the  law,  branched  off  from  the  other  organs  of  adminis- 
tration and  formed  a  distinct  department.  This  process,  however, 
was  gradual,  and  historic  remnants  of  judicial  powers  are  still 

1  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  pp.  175-187. 
273 


274          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

exercised  by  the  executive  and  by  the  legislature,  whose  differentia- 
tion preceded  that  of  the  judiciary.  The  ordinance  and  pardoning 
powers  of  the  executive  and  the  impeaching  power  of  the  legis- 
lature are  examples. 

Present  judicial  systems  are  complex,  though  showing  general 
resemblances.  Civil  and  criminal  cases  are  distinguished,  and  for 
each  there  is  a  series  of  courts,  the  lowest  disposing  of  petty  cases, 
higher  courts  having  jurisdiction  over  more  important  cases,  and 
a  final  court  having  jurisdiction  over  special  cases  and  hearing 
appeals  from  the  lower  courts.  This  general  system  is  modified 
by  both  a  separation  and  a  division  of  judicial  powers.  From  the 
standpoint  of  the  former  special  courts  are  created  as  various 
branches  of  administration  arise  and  demand  a  specialized  form  of 
jurisdiction.  Of  such  nature  are  courts-martial  for  the  discipline 
of  the  army  ;  admiralty  and  consular  courts,  necessitated  by  foreign 
commerce ;  probate  and  divorce  courts  to  regulate  family  rights 
and  inheritance ;  and  ecclesiastical  courts,  where  church  and  state 
are  not  separated.  In  continental  states  administrative  courts1 
form  a  separate  branch  of  the  department.  From  the  standpoint 
of  the  latter  the  jurisdiction  of  courts  is,  for  convenience,  limited 
to  certain  areas,  that  of  the  courts  of  first  instance  coinciding  with 
local  divisions,  and  that  of  the  higher  courts  covering  wider  areas. 
In  the  United  States  this  territorial  division  is  further  complicated 
by  the  separation  of  federal  and  commonwealth  courts,  practically 
duplicating  the  entire  system.  The  judicial  system  as  a  whole, 
considered  as  a  subdivision  of  administration,  includes  a  numerous 
body  of  officials  who  aid  in  bringing  cases  before  the  courts,  in 
administering  judicial  procedure,  and  in  carrying  out  judicial  deci- 
sions. Such  officials  include  constables,  prosecuting  attorneys  in 
criminal  cases,  juries,  and  prison  officials.  Thus  the  simple  and 
direct,  though  often  inconsistent  and  tyrannical,  judicial  procedure 
of  the  primitive  state  has  been  superseded  by  a  complex  and 
specialized  system.  Uniform  law  and  procedure  and  a  fair  chance 
for  the  accused  to  prove  his  innocence  has  been  gained,  in  some 
cases,  however,  at  the  cost  of  tedious  delay  and  of  failure  to 
punish  the  guilty. 

1  See  section  115. 


FTHE  JUDICIARY  275 

2.  As  to  the  status  of  individuals  before  the  law.  In  former 
times  there  was  not  uniform  law  for  all,  neither  were  all  equal 
before  the  law.  Slavery  was  universal  and  slaves  had  few  legal 
rights.  Women  were  legally  at  the  mercy  of  their  husbands,  and 
children,  of  their  fathers.  Society  was  often  divided  into  castes 
with  varying  legal  rights.  Even  in  the  Middle  Ages  the  clergy 
were  a  privileged  class  with  their  own  law  and  courts,  and  the 
nobility  possessed  special  rights  and  privileges.  The  growth  of 
democracy  has  created  the  present  legal  theory  that  all  individuals 
are  equal  before  the  law,  and  class  legislation  is  accordingly  frowned 
upon.  The  delay  or  evasion  of  punishment  in  the  case  of  wealthy 
offenders  and  the  favorable  legislation  secured  sometimes  by  ques- 
tionable means  are  survivals  of  the  older  order. 

3.  As  to  procedure  and  punishment.  Methods  of  trial  and  forms 
of  punishment  have  also  undergone  considerable  transformation. 
The  cruelty  and  injustice  of  trial  by  torture,  or  of  superstitious 
appeals  to  divine  power  through  oaths,  ordeals,  or  personal  combat 
have  been  replaced  by  more  reasonable  process.  Similarly,  the 
desire  for  revenge  or  retaliation,  resulting  often  in  punishment  of 
undue  severity,  and  falling  on  the  innocent  as  well  as  the  guilty, 
has  been  replaced  by  the  idea  of  prevention  of  crime  and  protec- 
tion of  society,  and  of  the  reformation  of  the  criminal.  Modern 
penal  systems  still  show  survivals  of  former  methods.  Capital  pun- 
ishment is  a  form  of  retaliation,  and  lynch  law  is  a  reversion  to 
the  most  primitive  form  of  vengeance ;  fines,  whose  amounts  are 
adjusted  to  the  degree  of  offense,  suggest  the  medieval  wergild ' ; 
and  imprisonment,  the  usual  penalty,  contains  the  element  of  pun- 
ishment as  well  as  that  of  prevention.  Modern  juvenile  courts  and 
reform  schools,  together  with  improved  methods  of  prison  admin- 
istration and  greater  knowledge  of  the  causes  and  conditions  of 
crime,  may  be  expected  to  diminish  the  proportion  of  offenders 
with  resultant  social  benefit. 

114.  Functions  and  requisites  of  the  judiciary.  The  judicial 
department  performs  the  important  function  of  applying  to  specific 
cases  the  principles  of  custom,  statutes,  and  written  constitutions. 
It  determines  what  are  the  facts  in  any  given  case,  what  is  the  law 
that  applies  to  the  case,  and  how  the  legal  rights  of  the  parties 


276          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

concerned  are  affected.  In  this  process  it  frequently  happens  that 
cases  arise  not  entirely  covered  by  existing  law,  or  that  discretion- 
ary powers  must  be  exercised  by  judges  in  determining  the  exact 
meaning  of  the  law,  in  expanding  its  details,  or  in  applying  gen- 
eral principles  of  justice  and  morality.  The  judicial  department 
thus  becomes  a  creator  of  law,  at  least  for  the  particular  case 
concerned.  In  England  and  the  United  States,  where  judicial 
decisions  are  quoted  as  precedents  and  usually  followed  in  sim- 
ilar cases,  such  "judge-made  law"  forms  a  considerable  part  of 
the  entire  system  of  jurisprudence. 

Since  judges,  serving  as  points  of  contact  between  the  will  of 
the  state  and  its  individual  members,  perform  functions  of  so  great 
importance,  they  should  possess  at  least  two  requisites  : 

1 .  They  should  be  thoroughly  trained  in  the  law.    Judicial  deci- 
sions demand  a  developed  judgment  and  a  vast  amount  of  legal 
knowledge.    This  is  largely  secured  by  selecting  judges  from  the 
ranks  of  skilled  lawyers,  and  by  a  healthy  public  opinion  which 
respects  the  judicial  office  and  disapproves  of  incompetency  in 
its  incumbents. 

2.  They  should  be  impartial.    Neither  personal  nor  political  inter- 
ests should  interfere  with  the  absolute  integrity  of  justice.    The 
necessary  judicial  independence  may  be  best  secured  by  a  perma- 
nent tenure  and  an  adequate  salary.    In  most  states  judges  hold 
office  during  good  behavior,  and  their  salaries  are  not  affected  by 
the  number  or  nature  of  their  decisions,  and  may  not  be  diminished 
during  their  terms  of  office.    Efforts  are  made  to  remove  them  from 
the  influence  of  the  other  departments  of  government,  and  to  pre- 
vent the  appearance  of  any  interested  motive  in  their  decisions. 
Many  of  the  commonwealths  of  the  United  States,  where  judges 
are  elected  for  short  terms  and  paid  small  salaries,  sometimes  in 
the  form  of  fees,  are  unfortunate  exceptions.    The  inferior  caliber 
of  such  a  judiciary  and  the  play  of  personal  and  political  motives 
in  its  decisions  are  inevitable  results. 

While  the  importance  of  the  judicial  department  and  its  great 
powers,  especially  in  Anglo-Saxon  countries,  can  scarcely  be  over- 
estimated, it  must  be  remembered  that,  in  addition  to  the  control 
of  the  executive  if  it  appoints  the  judges,  and  of  the  legislature 


THE  JUDICIARY  277 

which  must  appropriate  the  funds  necessary  to  maintain  their  activi- 
ties, the  courts  are  dependent  upon  the  action  of  the  executive 
department  to  enforce  their  decisions ;  that  they  must  apply  the 
law  as  it  exists,  subject  to  change  by  the  legislature ;  and  that  they 
can  act  only  when  cases  are  brought  before  them,  and  when  these 
cases  come  within  their  jurisdiction.  These  restrictions  are  usually 
sufficient  safeguards  against  a  tyrannical  use  of  the  large  and  in- 
dependent powers  of  the  judiciary. 

115.  Relation  of  judiciary  to  executive.  The  relation  of  the  judi- 
ciary to  the  executive  may  be  viewed  from  the  standpoint,  first,  of 
the  judicial  powers  of  the  executive  and  its  control  over  the  judi- 
ciary ;  second,  of  the  administrative  powers  of  the  judiciary  and  its 
control  over  the  executive.  The  former  is  in  most  respects  a  his- 
toric survival  of  the  original  unlimited  powers  of  the  executive. 
The  latter,  concerning  which  continental  practice  differs  from  that 
in  England  and  America,  depends  upon  the  prevailing  theory  as 
to  the  proper  separation  of  powers  and  the  relative  importance  of 
government  and  individual  liberty. 

The  executive  exercises  a  certain  control  over  the  judiciary 
because,  in  last  resort,  judicial  decisions  are  effective  only  if  sup- 
ported by  the  force  of  the  state,  and  this  force  is  at  the  command 
of  the  executive.  Besides,  the  executive  is  usually  given  large 
powers  of  appointment  to  judicial  offices  ;  and  while  the  permanent 
tenure  that  follows  appointment  prevents  continued  control,  the 
complexion  of  the  judiciary  may  be  influenced  by  the  political  prin- 
ciples maintained  by  the  executive  at  the  time  of  appointment. 
The  best  example  of  this  was  the  appointment  of  John  Marshall 
to  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  by  means  of  which  numerous 
decisions  favorable  to  the  federal  theories  of  government  were  given 
long  after  the  Republican  party,  maintaining  different  views,  had 
secured  control  of  the  other  departments. 

Of  more  importance  are  the  judicial  powers  that  are  still  exer- 
cised directly  by  the  executive  department.  These  survivals  of  the 
original  judicial  powers  of  the  state  are  concerned  mainly  with  the 
maintenance  of  discipline  in  the  army,  navy,  and  civil  service,  and 
in  the  application  and  enforcement  of  administrative  law.  Treason 
laws,  courts-martial  for  military  or  naval  offenders,  and  military 


278          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

law  in  times  of  riot  or  rebellion  are  examples.  Modern  states, 
however,  create  constitutional  and  statutory  safeguards  against  the 
arbitrary  use  of  these  powers.  The  right  of  courts  to  uphold  their 
dignity  by  punishing  offenders  for  "  contempt  of  court"  is  a  his- 
torical survival  of  the  time  when  a  court  was  a  mere  division  of 
administration,  and  disregard  of  its  commands  was  an  offense 
against  the  majesty  of  the  king.  The  pardoning  power  of  modern 
executives  is  a  still  more  direct  survival  of  their  original  judicial 
functions. 

The  most  important  judicial  powers  of  the  executive  are  found 
in  the  states  of  continental  Europe,  where  a  separate  system  of 
law  and  courts,  controlled  by  the  executive  department,  exists  for 
the  trial  of  officers  of  administration  charged  with  illegal  acts 
in  the  performance  of  their  official  duties.  These  administrative 
courts  are  characteristic  of  the  different  attitude  that  the  govern- 
ment assumes  to  the  individual  in  these  states,  as  contrasted  with 
that  prevailing  in  England  and  the  United  States.  In  the  latter 
the  officers  of  the  executive  are  responsible  to  the  ordinary  courts 
for  their  official  actions  ;  and  officials  are  frequently  held  personally 
responsible  for  acts  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  courts,  exceed 
their  lawful  authority.  The  legal  immunity  of  the  crown  in  Eng- 
land and  the  special  procedure  of  impeachment  for  the  president 
and  other  high  officials  in  the  United  States  are,  of  course,  excep- 
tions. Even  members  of  the  army  and  navy  are  responsible  for  the 
performance  of  illegal  acts,  although  done  at  the  command  of 
their  superior  officers ;  and,  in  general,  the  military  administration 
is  subordinated  to  the  civil.  In  this  way  the  Anglo-Saxon  states 
believe  that  individual  liberty  is  guaranteed  against  executive 
encroachment,  and  that  the  formation  of  a  specially  privileged 
bureaucracy  is  prevented.  Naturally  this  gives  large  powers  to  the 
judicial  department,  which  not  only  punishes  offending  officials, 
but,  by  the  issue  of  writs  of  mandamus  and  injunction,  may  compel 
officials  to  perform  or  to  refrain  from  performing  certain  acts. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  states  of  Europe,  emphasizing  efficient 
government  rather  than  individual  freedom,  believe  that  adminis- 
trative officials,  in  the  discretionary  performance  of  their  functions, 
may  have  occasion  to  violate  the  laws  that  apply  to  ordinary  citizens. 


THE  JUDICIARY  279 

In  such  case  they  are  called  to  account  before  special  administra- 
tive courts  composed  mainly  of  superior  executive  officials.  These 
apply  a  special  form  of  law  and  procedure,  basing  their  decisions 
mainly  on  administrative  ordinances,  and  taking  into  consideration 
political  expediency  and  general  principles  of  justice.  Under  this 
system  a  series  of  administrative  courts  exists  parallel  with  the 
ordinary  courts,  the  former  applying  administrative  law  to  public 
officials,  the  latter  applying  private  and  criminal  law  to  private 
individuals. 

Separate  administrative  courts  originated  in  France,  where  the 
national  administration  was  powerful  and  closely  centralized,  while 
the  judicial  bodies  —  the  local  parlements  —  were  not  united  into 
a  national  system.  The  powerful  monarchy  naturally  resented  in- 
terference with  its  acts  on  the  part  of  the  courts,  and  royal  officers 
took  the  place  of  the  older  judicial  bodies.  Montesquieu's  theory  as 
to  the  separation  of  powers  was  accordingly  interpreted  to  mean 
that  the  judiciary  should  not  interfere  with  the  executive ;  and  the 
separate  system  of  administrative  courts  has  been  adopted  by  every 
government  established  in  France  since  1 789,  and  imitated  by  the 
other  states  of  continental  Europe.  Even  in  the  United  States 
traces  of  administrative  jurisdiction  are  found  in  the  semijudicial 
bodies  acting  under  some  of  the  administrative  departments  and 
in  the  commissions  appointed  for  the  regulation  of  certain  public 
or  quasi-public  interests. 

Both  the  English-American  system  of  subordinating  public 
officials  to  the  ordinary  courts  and  the  continental  system  of 
separate  administrative  courts  have  certain  advantages  and  disad- 
vantages. While  the  former  offers  better  protection  to  individuals 
against  executive  aggression,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  applica- 
tion of  administrative  law  by  the  ordinary  courts  results  in  a  tech- 
nical procedure  and  in  the  formation  of  a  number  of  special 
remedies.  On  the  other  hand,  separate  administrative  law  and 
courts  makes  possible  a  simpler  law  and  procedure  for  public 
officials  in  their  administrative  acts,  and  allows  considerable  elas- 
ticity in  applying  principles  of  expediency  and  justice.  At  the 
same  time  there  is  the  constant  probability  of  conflict  between  the 
two  series  of  courts  or  between  the  administration  and  the  ordinary 


280         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

courts.  Sometimes  both  kinds  of  courts  claim  jurisdiction;  some- 
times both  refuse  to  take  jurisdiction.  The  fact  that  some  legal 
method  of  settling  these  conflicts  is  provided  does  not  obviate  the 
delay  and  expense  of  litigation  required  to  bring  a  case  before  the 
court  that  has  final  power  of  decision.  Even  more  important  is 
the  danger  that  justice  may  not  be  secured  under  administrative 
courts  if  governmental  policy  demands  a  certain  decision.  Individ- 
ual rights  are  often  sacrificed  when  the  administration  is  both  the 
offender  and  the  judge  of  the  offense ;  and  experience  shows  that 
the  principle  of  separate  administrative  law  and  courts  works  out 
in  practice  as  a  means  of  strengthening  the  executive. 

116.  Relation  of  judiciary  to  legislature.  In  addition  to  the 
fact  that  the  law  which  courts  interpret  and  apply  is,  in  the  main, 
created  by  legislatures,  and  that  legislative  appropriations  are 
necessary  for  the  maintenance  and  operation  of  the  judicial  depart- 
ment, legislatures  exert  a  further  control  over  the  ordinary  judiciary. 
Except  in  the  United  States,  where  the  federal  judiciary  is  pro- 
vided for  and  its  tenure  fixed  by  the  Constitution,  judicial  depart- 
ments are  created  by  legislative  statute  and  may  be  modified  or 
abolished  by  legislative  enactment.  Even  in  the  United  States  the 
judicial  department  has  been  organized  by  Congress,  and  might 
be  gradually  destroyed  if  Congress  abolished  each  judgeship  at  the 
expiration  of  the  term  of  its  incumbent,  and  Congress  may  hasten 
this  process  by  impeachment. 

In  most  states  certain  judicial  powers  have  been  retained  by 
the  upper  houses  of  their  legislatures.  The  reasons  for  this  are 
historical,  and  considerable  difference  exists  as  to  the  parties  and 
subjects  over  which  they  have  jurisdiction,  and  the  nature  of  the 
penalties  that  they  may  impose.  In  England  the  House  of  Lords 
is  nominally  the  highest  court  of  appeals.  In  practice  its  judicial 
functions  are  exercised  by  the  lord  chancellor,  who  may  be  a 
commoner,  and  by  four  jurists  appointed  by  the  crown  to  serve 
as  Lords  of  Appeals.  Impeachment,  though  it  was  an  important 
means  of  controlling  the  great  officials  of  government  in  the  de- 
velopment of  the  English  constitutional  system,  is  no  longer 
needed,  as  the  ministry  is  responsible  to  the  people  through 
the  House  of  Commons.  The  framers  of  the  United  States 


THE  JUDICIARY  28 1 

Constitution,  influenced  by  the  theory  of  the  separation  of  depart- 
ments, limited  the  judicial  powers  of  the  Senate  to  the  trial  of  gov- 
ernmental officials  for  indictable  offenses,  and  restricted  the  penalty 
to  dismissal  from  office  and  disqualification  for  future  officehold- 
ing.  This  power  of  impeachment  has  been  very  sparingly  used, 
and  the  independence  of  the  executive  and  the  judiciary  have 
accordingly  not  been  threatened,  although  a  negative  form  of 
responsibility  has  been  secured.  The  upper  house  in  Germany 
has  no  power  of  impeachment,  but  the  lower  house  may  sus- 
pend the  president  and  propose  his  recall  by  popular  vote.  The 
French  Senate  is  given  the  widest  powers  of  impeachment.  It  has 
jurisdiction  not  only  over  officials  but  over  any  person  considered 
dangerous  to  the  security  of  the  state,  and  no  limit  is  placed  on 
the  penalty  it  may  inflict.  Since  the  French  president  and  his 
ministers  are  practically  responsible  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies, 
and  the  ordinary  courts  are  able  to  deal  with  all  offenders,  the  pos- 
session of  such  extensive  powers  by  the  Senate  seems  unnecessary. 
The  most  important  form  of  judicial  control  is  that  exercised  by 
the  courts  in  declaring  statutes  void  because  enacted  by  bodies  in 
excess  of  their  legal  powers,  or,  as  usually  stated,  because  they  are 
"  unconstitutional."  This  principle  has  reached  its  highest  devel- 
opment in  the  United  States.  In  England  enactments  of  minor 
legislative  bodies  may  be  declared  illegal  by  the  courts,  and  in 
Germany  the  statutes  of  the  commonwealth  legislatures  have  oc- 
casionally been  set  aside  by  the  courts  as  contrary  to  the  common- 
wealth constitutions.  In  Canada  and  Australia  the  judiciary,  in 
interpreting  the  parliamentary  statutes  on  which  these  governments 
are  based,  exercises  analogous  functions.  However,  in  none  of 
these  states  may  the  judiciary  declare  acts  of  the  supreme  legis- 
lature unconstitutional.  Statutes  enacted  by  the  national  lawmaking 
bodies  of  England,  France,  and  Germany  are  accepted  as  final, 
even  if  in  direct  violation  of  written  constitutions,  and  the  con- 
stitution of  Switzerland  distinctly  provides  that  every  statute  of  the 
Federal  Assembly  must  be  regarded  as  valid.1  In  the  United  States, 
on  the  other  hand,  not  only  do  commonwealth  courts  disallow  acts 
of  the  commonwealth  legislatures,  if  contrary  to  commonwealth 

1  Swiss  constitution,  Art.  113. 


282          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

constitutions,  but  the  federal  courts  disallow  commonwealth  statutes, 
if  opposed  to  the  federal  Constitution  or  to  treaties  or  statutes  made 
in  pursuance  thereof,  and  even  set  aside  acts  of  Congress,  if 
contrary  to  their  interpretation  of  the  federal  Constitution. 

This  large  judicial  power  is  not  distinctly  set  forth  in  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  or  in  those  of  its  commonwealths, 
but  has  been  gradually  developed  by  the  courts  as  desirable  for  the 
maintenance  of  a  federal  government  with  coordinate  departments, 
and  of  a  written  constitution.  While  it  was  suggested  in  some 
early  decisions  of  English  courts  that  acts  of  Parliament  might 
be  so  unjust  that  the  courts  would  refuse  to  enforce  them,  this 
suggestion  never  became  an  established  rule.  On  the  contrary, 
the  principle  that  acts  of  Parliament  could  not  be  questioned  by 
the  courts  became  firmly  established  in  constitutional  law.  In  the 
colonies,  however,  appeal  was  frequently  taken  against  actions  of 
the  colonial  legislature  or  executive  to  the  king  in  council,  and 
the  courts  of  Great  Britain  declared  acts  of  the  colonial  legislatures 
invalid  on  the  ground  that  they  exceeded  the  powers  granted  by 
the  colonial  charters.  Thus  grew  up  in  America  the  idea  of  writ- 
ten constitutions,  of  delegated  powers,  and  of  judicial  review  of 
legislative  acts. 

Even  before  the  adoption  of  the  federal  Constitution  the  courts 
in  several  commonwealths  declared  acts  of  the  legislatures  uncon- 
stitutional, the  first  distinct  issue  being  in  1780,  in  the  New  Jersey 
case  of  Holmes  v.  Walton.  The  history  of  the  federal  convention 
shows  that  it  was  intended  to  give  the  federal  courts  power  to 
nullify  commonwealth  statutes  if  contrary  to  the  federal  Consti- 
tution, but  it  is  not  clear  that  this  power  extended  to  acts  of 
Congress.  In  1803,  in  the  case  of  Marbury  v.  Madison,  the 
Supreme  Court  declared  an  act  of  Congress  unconstitutional,  and 
therefore  void ;  and  in  the  case  of  Fletcher  v.  Peck,  in  1 8 1  o,  a 
commonwealth  statute  was  for  the  first  time  distinctly  annulled. 
Similar  decisions,  disallowing  commonwealth  statutes,  were  fre- 
quently made,  but  not  until  1851  was  another  federal  statute 
declared  void.  The  Dred  Scott  Case  (1857)  was  a  broad  applica- 
tion of  the  power  of  judicial  control ;  and  since  the  Civil  War 
judicial  revision  of  federal  legislation  has  been  rapidly  extended,  the 


THE  JUDICIARY  283 

Legal  Tender  Case  (1870),  the  Civil  Rights  Case  (1883-1884), 
the  Income  Tax  Case  (1895),  and  the  Insular  Cases  (1901)  being 
the  most  important  in  which  the  jurisdiction  of  Congress  has  been 
questioned.  This  principle  of  judicial  revision,  worked  out  by  the 
federal  courts,  was  gradually  adopted  in  the  commonwealths  with 
reference  to  their  laws,  and  is  now  an  accepted  part  of  our  juris- 
prudence. It  leads  to  a  strong  respect  for  constitutions  and  pre- 
vents radical  legislation  ;  at  the  same  time,  because  of  the  difficulty 
of  constitutional  amendment,  it  provides  an  elastic  method  of  ex- 
tending constitutions  to  meet  new  conditions.  This  is  especially 
true  in  the  federal  government  of  the  United  States,  where 
decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  have  become  the  usual  form  of 
constitutional  amendment. 

It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  courts,  even  in  the 
United  States,  may  act  only  when  the  case  comes  under  the  juris- 
diction that  is  given  to  them  by  the  Constitution  and  the  laws. 
With  many  broad  questions  of  constitutional  law  affecting  executive 
and  judiciary  the  courts  may  not  deal ;  and  they  may  act  only  when 
the  rights  of  legal  persons  are  involved  and  when  cases  are 
properly  brought  before  them.  Even  then  the  decision,  while  it 
is  conclusive  as  to  the  parties  before  the  court  and  serves  as  a 
precedent  for  future  cases,  does  not  repeal  the  statute  concerned. 
It  declares  that  in  the  particular  case  before  it  the  statute  will  not 
be  applied  because  it  never  was  a  valid  statute.  American  respect 
for  the  judiciary,  due  largely  to  the  fact  that  our  government  has 
been  created  and  controlled,  and  our  public  opinion  determined, 
in  the  main,  by  lawyers,  causes  the  other  departments  of  govern- 
ment to  yield  deference  to  such  decisions,  and  the  objectionable 
statutes  are  repealed  or  become  obsolete  through  nonenforcement. 

117.  Organization  of  the  judiciary.  The  preceding  discussion 
paves  the  way  for  a  brief  outline  of  judicial  organization  in  leading 
modern  states  : 

I.  England.  From  early  times  the  administration  of  justice  in 
England  was  centralized.  Judges  of  the  courts  of  Common  Law  went 
from  London  on  circuit,  and  the  Court  of  Chancery  at  Westminster 
extended  its  jurisdiction  over  the  entire  kingdom.  By  the  judicial 
reorganization  of  1873-1879  greater  uniformity  was  secured  and 


284         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

jurisdiction  was  more  logically  distributed ;  at  the  same  time  a 
certain  amount  of  decentralization  was  secured  by  the  creation  of 
local  county  courts,  which  have  largely  absorbed  the  functions  of 
the  earlier  circuit  judges.  At  present  the  judicial  system  of  Eng- 
land is  organized  as  follows  :  The  House  of  Lords,  really  the  lord 
chancellor  and  the  four  "law  lords,"  is  the  court  of  last  resort. 
Below  this  stand  the  Court  of  Appeal  and  the  High  Court  of  Justice. 
The  latter  is  subdivided  into  a  chancery  division,  a  king's  bench 
division,  and  a  probate,  divorce,  and  admiralty  division;  and  the 
judges  of  these  courts  try  cases  on  circuit  in  "assize  towns"  in 
various  parts  of  the  country.  The  lord  chancellor,  who  presides 
over  the  chancery  division,  and  the  lord  chief  justice,  who  presides 
over  the  king's  bench  division,  are  appointed  by  the  crown  on 
the  recommendation  of  the  prime  minister ;  other  judges  on  the 
recommendation  of  the  lord  chancellor.  Below  these  are  the  county 
courts  and  the  justices  of  the  peace.  The  latter  are  usually  coun- 
try gentlemen,  serving  without  pay,  and  play  an  important  part  in 
English  life.  Acting  singly,  they  may  hold  preliminary  examina- 
tions or  issue  warrants  ;  two  or  more  justices  may  hold  petty  ses- 
sions; and  all  the  justices  of  the  county  meet  quarterly  in  quarter 
sessions  for  their  more  important  judicial  functions.  All  criminal 
cases,  except  petty  cases  coming  before  courts  of  summary  juris- 
diction, are  tried  before  juries.  In  civil  cases  juries  are  falling  into 
disuse,  although  in  most  cases  a  jury  trial  may  be  demanded  by 
either  party. 

2.  France.  As  already  indicated,  the  judicial  department  in 
France  is  divided  into  administrative  courts  for  the  trial  of  public 
officials,  and  ordinary  courts  for  the  trial  of  private  individuals. 
The  former  consist  of  the  Council  of  State,  which  is  the  court  of 
last  resort  in  administrative  questions,  and  a  number  of  courts  and 
councils,  each  of  which  is  directly  subordinate  to  the  Council  of 
State.  Of  the  ordinary  courts  the  Cassation  Court  at  Paris  has  final 
authority.  Below  it  are  twenty-six  courts  of  appeal,  which  hear 
cases  brought  up  from  the  courts  of  first  instance  in  the  local  areas. 
Justices  of  the  peace  have  jurisdiction  over  petty  cases.  All  judges 
are  appointed  nominally  by  the  president,  actually  by  the  minister 
of  justice.  If  dispute  arises  as  to  whether  the  administrative  courts 


THE  JUDICIARY  285 

or  the  ordinary  courts  have  jurisdiction  in  a  given  case,  there  is  a 
Tribunal  of  Conflicts  whose  province  it  is  to  decide.  In  France 
juries  are  not  used  in  civil  cases,  the  judges  deciding  questions  both 
of  fact  and  of  law.  Juries  are  used,  however,  to  determine  inno- 
cence or  guilt  in  criminal  cases.  The  preliminary  examination  of 
criminal  indictments  is  not  conducted  by  a  "  grand  jury,"  as  it  is 
in  England  and  the  United  States,  but  by  an  examining  magis- 
trate (juge  d' instruction),  who  may  dismiss  the  case  or  send  it 
for  trial. 

3.  Germany.   The  new  constitution  of  Germany  contemplates  a 
system  of  national  courts,  both  judicial  and  administrative,  exist- 
ing side  by  side  with  the  courts  of  the  separate  commonwealths. 
Until  recently  the  courts  of  the  various  commonwealths  were  also 
national   courts,  the  judicial  districts  being  determined  and  the 
judges  being  appointed  by  the  commonwealth  governments.   In  the 
new  system  national  statutes  prescribe  a  uniform  judicial  organiza- 
tion and  procedure,  and  the  decisions  of  the  national  court  give  uni- 
formity to  the  law.  The  republic  also  has  uniform  civil,  commercial, 
and  criminal  codes.    As  in  France,  there  is  in  each  commonwealth 
a  series  of  administrative  courts  and  a  series  of  ordinary  courts, 
with  a  court  of  conflicts  standing  between  the  two  jurisdictions. 
Juries  are  used  only  in  the  graver  criminal  cases. 

4.  The  United  States.    The  judicial  system  of  the  United  States 
is  divided  into  two  distinct  series  of  courts,  the  commonwealth 
and  the  federal.    Each  commonwealth  has  its  own  set  of  courts, 
usually  of  three  grades,  and  these  apply  the  criminal  and  civil  law 
of  the  commonwealth.    Judges  are  sometimes  appointed  and  some- 
times elected.    Federal  courts,  whose  existence  is  provided  for  by 
the  Constitution,  consist  of  a  supreme  court,  the  circuit  courts 
of  appeals,  and  a  number  of  district  courts.    Federal  judges  are 
appointed  by  the  president,  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate. 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  federal  courts  extends  over  two  classes 
of  cases,  according  to  : 

I .  The  nature  of  the  parties  concerned.  Cases  in  which  the 
commonwealth  courts  could  not  properly  have  jurisdiction,  such  as 
cases  concerning  foreign  diplomatic  agents,  or  disputes  between 
two  commonwealths,  and  cases  in  which  commonwealth  courts 


286          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

could  not  have  entire  jurisdiction,  such  as  suits  between  citizens  of 
different  commonwealths,  come  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  federal 
courts. 

2.  The  nature  of  the  questions  involved.  Cases  of  admiralty  or 
maritime  jurisdiction,  and  all  cases  arising  under  the  Constitution, 
laws,  and  treaties  of  the  United  States  come  under  federal  jurisdic- 
tion. This  enables  the  national  government  to  maintain  the  same 
interpretation  of  the  Constitution  in  all  parts  of  the  United  States, 
and  to  enforce  a  uniform  system  of  federal  law. 

The  division  of  jurisdiction  among  the  various  federal  courts  is 
determined  by  act  of  Congress,  some  courts  having  both  original 
and  appellate  jurisdiction,  others  having  appellate  jurisdiction 
only. 

Congress  has  also  created  several  special  courts,  such  as  the 
Court  of  Claims,  to  try  cases  of  claims  against  the  United  States ; 
and  the  Court  of  Private  Land  Claims,  to  try  cases  arising  under  the 
treaties  of  territorial  cession  made  with  Mexico  in  1848  and  1853. 
In  addition,  Congress  has  created  courts  for  the  District  of  Colum- 
bia, for  the  territories  and  dependencies,  and  for  the  reservation 
Indians.  Such  courts  partake  of  the  nature  of  both  federal  and 
commonwealth  courts.  Except  in  the  higher  courts,  whose  deci- 
sions are  mainly  on  appeals,  juries  are  ordinarily  used  in  both 
civil  and  criminal  cases. 

While  each  commonwealth  determines  the  organization  of  its 
own  judicial  system  and  creates  its  own  law  and  procedure,  there 
is  a  general  uniformity  in  these  respects  to  be  found  over  the 
entire  United  States.  This  is  due,  in  the  main,  to  the  basis  of 
English  common  law  upon  which  the  legal  system  of  almost  all 
the  commonwealths  rests,  and  to  the  spirit  of  judicial  comity 
between  the  commonwealths.1  The  Constitution  of  the  United 
States2  requires  the  courts  of  each  commonwealth  to  give  full 
faith  and  credit  to  the  records  and  judicial  proceedings  of  the 
courts  of  other  commonwealths,  and  decisions  are  often  quoted 
as  precedents  in  commonwealths  other  than  that  in  which  the 
decision  was  rendered. 

1  Garner,  Introduction  to  Political  Science,  pp.  583-585. 

2  Article  IV,  section  i. 


THE  JUDICIARY  287 

Over  many  cases  federal  and  commonwealth  courts  have  con- 
current jurisdiction,  although  the  defendant  in  such  cases  may 
usually  remove  the  case  to  a  federal  court  if  he  chooses,  or  may 
have  the  decision  of  a  commonwealth  court  reviewed  by  the 
Supreme  Court,  if  any  right  arising  under  the  Constitution  or  laws 
of  the  United  States  is  involved.  In  practice  many  cases  over 
which  the  federal  judicial  power  extends  are  left  to  the  common- 
wealth courts,  although  in  such  cases  a  transfer  to  the  federal 
courts  may  be  made  either  before  or  after  a  decision  has  been 
given.  In  these  and  other  ways  the  judicial  system  of  the  United 
States  is  adjusted,  federal  and  commonwealth  courts  complement- 
ing each  other,  with  final  authority,  in  case  of  disputed  jurisdiction, 
lying  in  the  Supreme  Court. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XXI 

REFERENCES 

FUNCTIONS  OF  POLITICAL  PARTIES 

1.  MAKE  DEMOCRACY  WORKABLE  OVER  LARGE  AREAS 

2.  MAKE  DECISION  OF  GREAT  ISSUES  POSSIBLE 

3.  PREVENT  TOO  GREAT  SEPARATION  AND  DIVISION  OF  POWERS 

HISTORY  OF  POLITICAL  PARTIES 

1.  IN  ENGLAND 

2.  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

3.  IN  CONTINENTAL  EUROPE 

PRESENT  POLITICAL  PARTIES 

1.  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

2.  IN  ENGLAND 

3.  IN  FRANCE 

4.  IN  GERMANY 
PARTY  ORGANIZATION 

1.  IN  CONTINENTAL  EUROPE 

2.  IN  ENGLAND 

3.  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

a.  Caucuses  and  conventions 

b.  Committees 

PARTY  REFORM 

1 .  ADVANTAGES  AND  DISADVANTAGES  OF  THE  PARTY  SYSTEM 

2.  EVILS  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 

a.  Spoils  system 

b.  The  "  machine  "  and  the  "  boss  " 

c.  Connection  between  national  and  local  politics 

d.  Connection  between  business  and  colitics 


288 


CHAPTER  XXI 
POLITICAL  PARTIES 

REFERENCES 

BRYCE,  J.  The  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  I,  chaps,  liii-liv;  Vol.  II,  chaps. 

Iv-lxxv 

DALLINGER,  F.  W.  Nominations  for  Elective  Office  in  the  United  States 
FORD,  H.  J.  Rise  and  Growth  of  American  Politics 
GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Politics  and  Administration,  chaps,  vi-x 
HART,  A.  B.  Actual  Government,  chap,  v 

HOPKINS,  J.  H.  History  of  Political  Parties  in  the  United  States 
JEPHSON,  H.  The  Platform,  its  Rise  and  Progress 
LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  Part  II,  chap,  viii 
LOWELL,  A.  L.  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe,  Vol.  I,  chaps. 

ii,  iv ;  Vol.  II,  chaps,  vii,  xiii 
LOWELL,  A.  L.  The  Government  of  England,  Vol.  I,  chaps,  xxiv-xxx  ;  Vol.  II, 

chaps,  xxxi-xxxvii 

MACY,  J.  Party  Organization  and  Machinery 

OSTROGORSKI,  M.  Democracy  and  the  Organization  of  Political  Parties 
SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chap,  xxix 
SMITH,  J.  A.  The  Spirit  of  American  Government,  chap,  viii 
WOODBURN,  J.  A.   Political  Parties  and  Party  Problems  in  the  United  States 
WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Part  III,  chap,  xiv 

118.  Functions  of  political  parties.  A  political  party  consists 
of  a  group  of  citizens,  more  or  less  organized,  who  act  as  a  politicaj 
unit,  and  who,  by  the  use  of  their  voting  power,  aim  to  contrd  the 
^government  and  rarry  mir,  their  generarpolicies.  JWhile  existing, 
in  the  main,  outside  the  legal  organization  of  the  state,  political 
parties  form  at  present  the  vital  force  that  keeps  the  machinery 
of  the  state  in  operation. 

When  the  functions  performed  by  political  parties  and  the 
reasons  for  their  existence  are  analyzed,  the  close  connection  be- 
tween political  parties  and  democracy  is  evident.1  In  despotisms, 
where  the  people  have  no  legal  voice  in  government,  they  can 
express  disapproval  or  desire  for  change  only  by  assassination  or 
armed  rebellion.  By  such  methods  an  obnoxious  ruler  may  be 

1  Macy,  Party  Organization  and  Machinery,  Introduction. 
289 


290          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

deposed,  but  through  them  there  is  little  hope  of  establishing  per- 
manently a  more  tolerable  form  of  government  or  of  substituting 
a  consciously  formed  general  will  for  the  will  of  the  despot.  Grad- 
ually, however,  the  voluntary  association  of  subjects  to  resist 
tyrannical  rulers  developed  democracy.  Large  bodies  of  men 
became  accustomed  to  form  and  execute  common  purposes  ;  the 
principles  of  election  and  representation  in  selecting  governing 
officials  were  introduced  ;  the  electorate  was  widened  ;  and  restric- 
tions were  placed  on  government  by  means  of  written  constitu- 
tions and  of  referendums.  In  the  democracies  thus  established 
some  form  of  organization  was  necessary  in  order  that  the  people 
might  continue  to  formulate  and  execute  their  will ;  and  the  vol- 
untary associations,  through  whose  efforts  democracy  was  secured, 
were  perpetuated  in  political  parties,  by  means  of  which  democracy 
is  workable.  Political  parties  are  never  found  except  in  democ- 
racies ;  political  parties,  of  some  degree  of  organization  and  in- 
fluence, always  exist  in  democracies.  In  the  Greek  cities  and  in 
the  Roman  republic,  factions,  or  parties,  controlled  the  govern- 
ment ;  in  the  free  cities  of  the  Middle  Ages  similar  groupings 
arose ;  and  in  all  modern  democratic  states  parties  exist  in  the 
form  of  associations,  back  of  the  government,  into  which  the 
people  are  organized. 

In  democracies  political  parties  arise,  or  new  groupings  are 
formed,  in  the  presence  of  great  issues.  When  difference  of 
opinion  exists  on  general  questions  of  vital  interest  to  the  state, 
minor  disagreements  are  forgotten  and  parties  are  formed  as 
people  take  sides  on  the  main  questions.  Such  division  may  be 
based  upon  racial  differences,  especially  if  one  race  is  an  invader 
or  conqueror.  In  central  Europe  parties  follow  national  lines. 
Sometimes  religious  differences  give  rise  to  parties,  as  was  the 
case  in  all  parts  of  Europe  during  the  sixteenth  century,  and  is 
now  illustrated  by  the  political  organization  of  the  Catholic  party  in 
Germany.  Usually  questions  of  internal  organization  or  policy  lie 
at  the  basis  of  parties.  The  contest  between  king  and  people  gave 
birth  to  political  parties  in  England,  and  traces  of  the  same  con- 
test are  found  in  the  monarchial  parties  in  France,  the  republican 
parties  in  Spain,  and  the  parties  formed  on  the  lines  of  class 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  291 

distinction  in  many  parts  of  Europe.  The  form  of  union  to  be  estab- 
lished by  the  American  commonwealths  and  the  extent  of  national 
powers  were  questions  on  which  the  people  of  the  United  States 
disagreed.  At  present  most  political  issues  are  economic  in  nature, 
and  parties  represent  common  interests  in  occupations,  common 
economic  classes,  or  common  ideas  as  to  economic  policy  and 
regulation.  The  landed  classes,  the  capitalists,  the  labor  party, 
socialists,  free  traders,  free  silverites,  and  similar  groupings  are 
typical. 

Even  in  the  absence  of  important  issues  or  of  natural  lines  of 
cleavage  political  parties  may  retain  their  organization  and  strength. 
This  will  be  the  case  in  democratic  states  when  the  political  party 
has  become,  legally  or  extralegally,  a  part  of  the  actual  govern- 
ment, and  acts  as  a  unifying  agency,  securing  harmony  of  action 
among  the  various  departments  and  divisions  of  the  governmental 
system.  In  the  United  States,  where  the  principles  of  separation 
and  division  of  powers  have  been  carried  to  greatest  extremes, 
there  is  particular  need  for  such  a  force.  Executive,  legislature, 
and  judiciary  are  independent  and  may  work  at  cross  purposes. 
National,  commonwealth,  and  local  governments  have  distinct 
functions  with  few  points  of  contact.  To  bind  these  disconnected 
organs  into  a  unity  and  secure  the  harmonious  operation  of  the 
entire  government  of  the  United  States,  by  controlling  the  officials 
and  the  policy  of  all  departments  in  all  areas,  is  the  work  of 
political  parties  ;  and  to  do  this  work  they  have  been  compelled  to 
develop  and  maintain  a  complex  and  powerful  organization.  In 
England  the  party  performs  a  similar  function  in  a  different  way. 
The  effectiveness  of  the  cabinet  system,  by  which  the  party  in 
power  controls  the  executive  through  its  majority  in  the  legislature, 
depenSsUpbn  permanent,  well-organized  parties  ;  the  one  in  power 
directing  both  legislation  and  administration,  the  one  in  opposition 

ready  tO  takp  up  this  sarnp  fnnrHnn  at  any  fimf>. 

In    both     tVifiQp     gtatec^    th^n      anH     fn    fl     jpgcgr    rtegiw*     in 


modernstates.  political  parties  serve  as  the  motive  force  and  the 
unitying  agency  that  make  democracy  workable  over  large  areas. 
They^are  a  constant  protest  against  too  great  separation  of  admin- 
istration from  legislation,  and  of  local  from  central  organization. 


292          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Since  the  government  of  every  state  is  a  unit  and  must  act  as  a 
unit,  defects  in  organization,  preventing  unity,  are  made  good  by 
the  growth  of  extralegal  institutions  whose  strength  will  depend 
upon  the  work  that  they  must  do. 

A  general  summary  of  the  functions  of  political  parties  may  be 
stated  as  follows.  In  democracies  they  furnish  the  organization  by 
which,  through  elections,  referendums,  and  the  influence  of  public 
opinion,  general  wil]  rpay  ^  fnrrm^fprl  nnrl  ramVH  into  pffWj^ 
When  great  issues  arise  they  furnish  a  means  by  which  citizens 
may  subordinate  lesser  differences  of  opinion  and 


Where  considerable  separation  or  division  of 
powers  exists  parties  serve  as  a  unifying  force,  which,  by  con- 
trolling the  various  organs  of  government,  secures  harmonious  and 
consistent  policy  and  administration.  Accordingly,  other  things 
being  equal,  political  parties  will  be  best  organized  and  most 
powerful  in  the  most  democratic  states,  in  states  where  the  most 
critical  issues  are  found,  and  in  states  organized  most  completely 
on  the  basis  of  separation  and  division  of  powers.  Various  com- 
binations of  these  conditions  determine,  in  the  main,  the  party 
situation  in  modern  states. 

119.  History  of  political  parties.  The  present  position  of 
political  parties,  recognized  by  all  as  essential  factors  in  political 
life,  and  in  some  states  made  a  legal  part  of  the  governmental 
system,  is  comparatively  new.  Even  in  the  eighteenth  century 
party  government  was  not  foreseen  ;  and  parties,  commonly  called 
"factions,"  were  considered  dangerous  to  public  welfare.  Party 
contests  suggested  disorder  and  violence,  the  overturning  of  estab- 
lished governmental  institutions,  revolution,  and  the  death  or  exile 
of  defeated  leaders.  Even  in  England,  where  party  struggles  were 
carried  on  earlier  and  with  greater  freedom  than  elsewhere,  such 
conditions  were  found.  The  framers  of  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  while  creating  a  form  of  organization  that  made 
strong  parties  inevitable,  made  no  provision  for  them  in  their  plan, 
and  hoped  that  "  factions  "  would  be  unknown  in  America.  The 
great  contribution  of  the  past  century  has  been  the  creation  of 
parties,  all  of  whom  are  loyal  to  the  established  governments  and 
institutions  of  their  states,  so  that  the  opposition  party  may  come 


POLITICAL  PARTIES 


293 


into  power  without  a  shock  to  the  political  traditions  of  the  state. 
Such  is  now  the  case  in  England  and  the  United  States.  In  the 
newer  democracies  of  the  continent,  France  and  Italy  for  example, 
party  groups,  called  "  irreconcilables, "  opposed  to  the  existing 
form  of  government,  are  still  found. 

Considerable  grounds  for  the  former  distrust  of  political  parties 
were  given  by  the  history  of  those  states  in  which  political  parties 
were  foreshadowed.  The  class  struggles  and  factional  quarrels  at 
Athens  and  Rome,  the  Guelph  and  Ghibelline  contest  that  disturbed 
the  Italian  republics,  the  riots  between  the  supporters  of  the  house 
of  Orange  and  the  Republicans  in  the  Netherlands,  and  the  civil 
war  in  England  showed  the  inevitable  tendency  to  form  voluntary 
associations  as  soon  as  some  degree  of  democracy  existed,  and 
seemed  conclusive  proof  that  such  factions  were  dangerous  to 
public  peace  and  political  stability. 

In  their  modern  form  political  parties  originated  in  England. 
Even  in  Elizabeth's  time  the  Puritans  appeared  as  a  body  of  men 
holding  the  same  views  on  definite  religious  and  political  questions, 
and  trying  to  secure  their  establishment  in  opposition  to  the  wishes 
of  the  queen  and  her  ministers.  As  the  contest  between  king 
and  people  developed  in  the  Stuart  period,  the  opponents  of  arbi- 
trary government  in  church  and  state  became  known  as  Round- 
heads, while  the  supporters  of  the  king  were  called  Cavaliers  ;  and 
these  soon  formed  the  opposing  factions  of  a  civil  war.  The  Res- 
toration brought  the  Cavaliers  into  the  ascendancy,  but  the  opposing 
party  revived,  and  by  the  time  of  the  debates  over  the  Exclusion 
Bill  (1679)  the  factions  received  the  nicknames  of  Tory  and 
Whig.  These  parties  represented  two  different  theories  of  English 
constitutional  relations.  The  Tories  were  the  upholders  of  absolute 
monarchy ;  the  Whigs  desired  a  monarchy  limited  by  Parliament. 
The  Tories  desired  no  change  in  the  organization  or  functions  of 
government ;  the  Whigs  subordinated  the  form  of  government  to 
the  needs  of  public  welfare. 

After  the  Revolution  of  1688  the  more  extreme  Tories  became 
Jacobites  and  finally  died  out ;  the  remainder  became  the  support- 
ers of  the  king  of  England,  and  gradually  came  to  recognize  the 
rights  of  Parliament  and  of  the  people.  With  the  accession  of  the 


294          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

house  of  Hanover  the  Whigs,  the  opponents  of  royal  prerogative, 
found  themselves  the  supporters  of  the  new  dynasty,  while  the 
Tories,  the  upholders  of  royal  power,  were  the  opposition.  This 
destroyed  the  original  issue,  and  party  enmity  and  political  violence 
subsided.  For  a  time  parties  degenerated  into  personal  factions 
among  the  ruling  classes,  but  the  way  was  prepared  for  new  par- 
ties, based  on  modern  issues  and  holding  their  present  position  in 
the  government.  By  the  time  of  George  III  the  present  Liberal 
and  Conservative  parties  had  been  formed.  The  Liberal  party 
became  the  advocate  of  reform  and  progress.  They  favored  the 
widening  of  the  suffrage,  the  more  equitable  system  of  represen- 
tation, the  removal  of  religious  disabilities  and  of  restrictions  on 
industry  and  trade.  The  Conservative  party  emphasized  order  and 
security.  They  held  to  the  old  historic  view  of  the  constitution, 
and  desired  to  safeguard  vested  interests  and  resist  dangerous 
innovations. 

At  present  the  old  distinctions  are  passing  away.  Many  reforms 
have  been  the  work  of  the  Conservatives,  and  new  issues  such  as 
home  rule,  protection,  imperialism,  and  public  education  are  sup- 
ported or  opposed  by  members  of  both  parties.  The  present  crisis 
(1914)  over  home  rule  will  probably  cause  a  tightening  of  party 
lines ;  but,  in  general,  party  organization  is  maintained,  as  in  the 
United  States,  because  of  the  work  that  the  party  must  perform 
in  government. 

In  the  American  colonies  party  lines  were  drawn  similar  to  those 
in  England  and  in  each  colony  a  conflict  was  carried  on  between 
the  governor,  representing  the  crown,  and  the  assembly,  repre- 
senting the  colonists.  The  division  within  the  colonies  between 
the  friends  and  the  opponents  of  royal  prerogative  became  national 
in  scope  and  organization  as  the  Revolution  approached,  —  Patriots 
and  Tories  representing  respectively  the  enemies  and  the  friends 
of  England.  In  every  colony  the  Patriots  secured  possession  of 
the  government,  and  the  outcome  of  the  war  destroyed  the  Tories 
as  a  political  power,  since  those  who  did  not  migrate  to  Canada  or 
England  were  compelled  to  accept  the  new  state  of  affairs. 

After  independence  was  secured  the  form  of  government  became 
the  issue.  Those  who  desired  a  strong  central  government  and 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  295 

favored  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  organized  as  Federalists, 
their  opponents  as  Antifederalists.  After  a  bitter  fight  in  every 
commonwealth  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  destroyed  the  Anti- 
federalists  as  a  party,  but  the  same  general  division  has  existed 
to  this  day.  On  the  one  hand  is  the  progressive  party,  favoring 
liberal  interpretation  of  the  Constitution,  protective  policy,  imperial- 
ism, and  general  extension  of  governmental  power.  On  the  other 
is  the  conservative  party,  upholding  a  policy  of  strict  construction 
and  anti-expansion  of  governmental  powers.  In  general  the  party 
in  power  leans  to  the  former,  and  the  party  in  opposition  to  the 
latter  attitude. 

During  Washington's  administration  the  opposing  elements  crys- 
tallized into  the  first  parties  under  the  Constitution.  The  Federal- 
ists, led  by  Hamilton,  favored  strong  national  government  and 
protection  of  property  interests.  They  were  friendly  to  England  in 
her  great  contest  with  France,  and  were  supported  by  the  commer- 
cial and  manufacturing  classes.  The  Republicans,  led  by  Jefferson, 
emphasized  the  rights  of  the  individual  and  opposed  extensive  gov- 
ernmental authority.  They  were  friendly  to  France,  where  the 
revolutionists  were  proclaiming  similar  principles,  and  secured  their 
main  support  among  the  agricultural  and  laboring  classes. 

A  number  of  causes  led  to  the  disappearance  of  the  Federal 
party.  Amon'g  these  were  the  growing  democratic  spirit  of  the 
country,  internal  dissensions  among  the  Federalist  leaders,  and 
unpopular  methods,  such  as  the  Alien  and  Sedition  acts  and  op- 
position to  the  War  of  1812.  Besides,  the  Republicans,  who  came 
into  power  in  1801,  took  over  the  strongest  principles  of  the  Fed- 
eralists and  were  joined  by  many  former  Federalist  leaders.  As  a 
result,  from  about  1816  to  1832  there  were  no  distinct  issues  and 
no  strong  parties.  Men  divided  on  personal  grounds,  and  this  so- 
called  "  era  of  good  feeling  "  was  really  a  period  of  bitter  personal 
politics. 

By  1830  new  parties  began  to  form.  Jackson,  extending  the 
ideas  of  Jefferson  concerning  popular  sovereignty,  applied  the  strict- 
construction  principles  in  the  form  of  opposition  to  the  tariff,  the 
national  bank,  and  internal  improvements.  His  followers  took  the 
name  of  Democrats,  and  his  opponents,  centering  around  Henry 


296          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Clay,  took  the  name  of  Whigs.  During  the  succeeding  twenty 
years  the  chief  tendencies  were  the  growth  of  democratic  spirit  — 
due  to  industrial  and  commercial  development,  increased  immigra- 
tion, and  the  opening  up  of  the  West  —  and  the  rise  of  modern 
political  methods,  such  as  party  organization,  nominations,  the 
caucus,  and  the  spoils  system. 

The  slavery  controversy  split  both  parties  and  led  to  a  section- 
alization  of  issues.  Numerous  antislavery  organizations,  concen- 
trating their  strength,  formed  the  Republican  party,  and  in  1860 
elected  their  president.  While  the  Civil  War  removed  the  leading 
issues,  the  Republican  and  Democratic  parties  retain  their  organ- 
ization and  contest  elections  in  all  governing  areas.  As  a  survival 
of  the  Civil  War,  the  Democratic  party  remains  firmly  intrenched  in 
the  South  ;  but  most  issues  are  now  raised  for  campaign  purposes, 
and  the  party  in  power  adapts  its  policies  to  circumstances  and  to 
public  opinion. 

In  addition  to  the  main  current  of  politics  in  the  United  States, 
numerous  small  parties,  standing  for  particular  or  temporary  inter- 
ests, have  arisen,  but  have  never  exerted  a  controlling  influence 
in  national  politics.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned  the  Know- 
Nothing  party,  the  Prohibition  party,  and  the  various  Socialist  and 
Labor  parties. 

The  history  of  political  parties  in  the  various  states  of  conti- 
nental Europe  is  a  complex  and  confusing  story.  Even  a  brief 
outline  of  their  origin  and  growth  would  necessitate  extensive  dis- 
cussion of  the  internal  and  international  difficulties  of  the  past 
century.  Arising  during  the  various  revolutions  through  which  the 
existing  degree  of  democracy  has  been  evolved,  they  neither  rep- 
resent consistent  lines  of  development  nor  are  they  based  on  uni- 
form political  principles.  In  no  European  state  have  two  perma- 
nent and  well-organized  parties  developed,  nor  do  parties  occupy 
as  prominent  a  place  in  government  as  they  do  in  England  and 
the  United  States.  Party  groups  are  formed  on  lines  of  race,  re- 
ligion, class  spirit,  and  economic  interests.  Personal  followers  of 
former  royal  lines  or  of  present  popular  leaders  form  additional 
political  groups,  and  shifting  combinations  are  held  together  tem- 
porarily by  common  grievances  or  by  common  hope  of  gain.  In 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  297 

each  state  peculiar  conditions  of  national  life  or  particular  phases 
of  national  history  give  rise  to  groups  that,  for  a  time  at  least, 
consider  themselves  political  associations.  Party  history  is  there- 
fore a  series  of  kaleidoscopic  changes,  concerted  action  in  time 
of  crisis  or  under  a  powerful  leader  being  followed  by  disintegra- 
tion as  minor  differences  again  assert  themselves  or  as  parties  are 
manipulated  by  skillful  statesmen.  Aside  from  the  parties  formed 
on  racial  or  religious  lines,  and  from  those  opposed  to  the  existing 
form  of  government,  various  shades  of  conservatism  and  radicalism 
are  represented.  In  general,  the  Socialists  exhibit  the  most  definite 
and  consistent  policy,  branches  of  this  party  being  found  in  all  the 
leading  states. 

120.  Present  political  parties.  The  preceding  discussion  of  the 
history  of  political  parties  and  of  their  functions  suggests  certain 
conditions  of  good  party  government.  For  instance,  the  existence 
of  two  distinct  and  well-organized  parties  is  presupposed.  If  more 
than  two  parties  exist,  difficulties  are  met  in  controlling  the  gov- 
ernment by  means  of  the  party  system.  Besides,  the  party  out  of 
power  must  not  be  revolutionary.  It  must  be  recognized  as  a  legiti- 
mate body,  entitled  to  attain  to  power  and  trusted  to  rule  without 
overthrowing  fundamental  political  principles.  Further,  certain 
lines  of  cleavage  are  undesirable.  Racial  and  religious  differences, 
or  distinctions  based  on  social  classes,  are  dangerous,  since  they 
kindle  bitter  passions,  each  side  believing  that  the  other  is  com- 
posed of  enemies  that  are  threatening  the  very  foundations  of  the 
state.  Real  differences  of  opinion  on  public  matters  of  general 
concern  form  the  natural  basis  for  political  parties. 

frrappiyingthese  general  principles  to  the  existing  party  situ- 
ation in  modern  states  considerable  variation  is. found.  On  the  one 
hand  stand  England  and  the  United  States,  each  of  which  has 
two  strong  parties,  based,  originally  at  least,  on  public  issues,  and 
furnishing  the  motive  force  for  government.  These  states  differ, 
however,  since  in  England,  whose  government  is  parliamentary, 
the  party  is  a  legal  part  of  the  political  system,  thoroughly  in  har- 
mony with  the  organization  of  government.  In  the  United  States 
the  party  has  grown  up  outside  the  constitutional  system  and 
operates  it  indirectly.  In  Europe  a  different  situation  is  found. 


298          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Numerous  party  groups,  based  on  racial,  religious,  and  social  issues, 
struggle,  through  shifting  combinations,  to  control  the  government. 
Irreconcilables,  opposed  to  the  existing  form  of  government,  are 
found  in  several  states.  Accordingly,  while  the  forms  of  party 
government  have  been  imitated,  the  foundations  upon  which  that 
system  rests  are  lacking,  and  parties  play  a  subordinate  part.  Nat- 
urally, then,  popular  control  is  weakened,  and  actual  power  rests 
with  an  official  bureaucracy  or  an  irresponsible  legislature. 

The  party  situation  in  leading  modern  states  may  be  outlined  as 
follows : 

I .  The  United  States.  At  the  present  time  political  parties  in 
the  United  States  show  the  most  highly  developed  organization 
and  exercise  the  greatest  powers.  A  number  of  reasons  for  this 
condition  may  be  given.  Great  extent  of  territory  and  a  large  pop- 
ulation composed  of  various  nationalities,  and  including  numerous 
interests  and  sections,  make  it  difficult  for  the  majority,  unless  1 
organized,  to  express  its  will.  The  separation  of  executive  and 
legislative  departments  and  the  division  into  federal,  common- 
wealth, and  local  governing  areas  create  a  system  of  governmental 
decentralization,  necessitating  some  extralegal  unifying  agency  to 
secure  harmony  in  action.  Moreover,  the  large  number  of  elective 
officials,  the  frequent  elections,  and  the  fact  that  reelection  is 
unusual,  have  given  strength  to  parties  through  their  control  of 
nominations  and  elections. 

This  is  particularly  true  in  the  election  of  the  president.  In  the 
actual  working  of  the  method  provided  by  the  federal  Constitution 
for  electing  the  president,  it  soon  became  evident  that  the  real 
selection  would  not  depend  upon  the  judgment  of  the  electoral 
college.  Since  its  members  assembled  by  commonwealths,  not 
meeting  together  for  deliberation,  and  since  the  exclusion  from  the 
college  of  federal  officeholders  kept  out  the  leaders  in  national 
life,  the  college  became  a  mere  machine  for  registering  popular 
will.1  In  the  large  electorate  thus  created  for  electing  the  national 
head,  some  organization  to  control  nomination  and  election  was 
inevitable  ;  and,  unprovided  for  in  the  constitutional  system  proper, 
it  grew  up  outside  the  framework  of  the  government  and  is  adjusted 

1  Lowell,  The  Government  of  England,  Vol.  I,  p.  440. 


POLITICAL  PARTIES 


299 


to  it  with  difficulty.  As  a  result,  owing  to  the  extralegal  position 
of  the  party  and  the  irresponsibility  of  its  leaders,  an  exceptionally 
strong  organization  is  needed  to  enable  it  to  do  its  work. 

The  peculiar  relation  of  parties  to  government  in  the  United 
States  is  worked  out  suggestively  in  Goodnow's  "  Politics  and 
Administration."  A  brief  summary  follows  :  The  primary  functions 
of  the  state  are  the  making  and  the  enforcing  of  law.  Practical 
political  necessity  demands  harmony  between  the  expression  of 
state  will  and  its  execution,  and  popular  government  requires  the 
subordination  of  the  executing  to  the  expressing  authority.  In  the 
United  States,  because  of  the  extreme  to  which  the  theory  of 
separation  of  powers  has  been  carried,  this  harmony  and  subordi- 
nation is  not  provided  for  in  the  legal  organization  of  the  state ; 
hence  it  has  been  secured  by  means  of  political  parties,  which,  as 
extralegal  parts  of  the  governmental  system,  aim  to  control  both 
legislation  and  administration. 

Again,  in  every  large  state  a  distinction  between  central  and 
local  governmental  functions  is  necessary,  and  this  division  is  par- 
ticularly evident  in  federal  states.  Here  again,  however,  the  har- 
monious working  of  government  demands  the  subordination  of 
local  to  central  administration.  In  the  United  States  division  of 
powers  is  carried  to  great  lengths,  and  local  officials  are  almost 
entirely  free  from  central  administrative  control.  Political  parties, 
therefore,  controlling  both  central  and  local  politics,  and  using 
offices  as  rewards  for  party  service,  are  the  real  bonds  of  union. 
As  a  result,  then,  of  the  great  amount  of  work  that  parties  must 
perform  in  the  United  States,  their  powers  are  large  and  their 
organization  is  strong,  and  since  they  exist  outside  the  legal  organ- 
ization of  the  government  their  leaders  are  irresponsible. 

The  "spoils  system"  and  the  "-boss"  are  therefore  natural 
results  of  American  conditions,  and  the  chief  needs  are  greater 
centralization  in  administration,  granting  at  the  same  time  local 
self-government  in  the  form  of  local  legislative  power,  and  legal 
recognition  of  political  parties  by  governmental  regulation  of 
nominations  and  elections.  By  such  means  the  work  required 
of  the  parties  will  be  lessened  and  party  leaders  will  be  made 
responsible. 


100         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

»J 

At  the  present  time  no  distinct  issues  separate  parties  in  the 
United  States.  The  "free-silver"  movement  of  1896  split  both 
parties,  especially  the  Democratic,  and  for  a  time  it  seemed  that 
horizontal  party  lines,  corresponding  to  social  classes,  would  be 
formed.  Colonial  expansion,  after  the  Spanish  War,  created  a 
new  issue  in  1900,  on  which  the  Democrats  are  conservative, 
opposing  our  foreign  colonial  policy,  while  the  Republicans  stand 
for  the  control  of  subject  peoples  in  the  interest  of  expansion  and 
commerce.  The  tariff  is  still  a  favorite  subject  of  controversy, 
although  the  desire  for  large  national  income  and  the  influence  of 
complex  business  interests  prevent  the  party  in  power,  whichever 
it  may  be,  from  making  radical  changes.  On  most  other  questions 
the  parties  follow  an  opportunistic  policy,  adapting  their  platforms 
to  current  public  opinion  and  to  the  various  interests  within  the 
party.  Organization  is  jealously  maintained  and  the  chief  aim  is 
to  win  elections  and  get  the  offices.  Existing  minor  parties,  such 
as  the  Prohibitionists  and  the  various  socialist  and  labor  groups, 
exert  little  influence  in  national  elections  and  have  no  represen- 
tation in  Congress,  although  the  voting  strength  of  the  Socialists 
is  increasing. 

2.  England.  While,  in  the  United  States,  parties  developed 
after  the  formation  of  the  constitutional  system,  as  a  means  of 
working  the  cumbrous  machinery  already  provided,  in  England 
the  existing  constitutional  system,  in  its  actual  operation,  grew  out 
of  party  life  and  contests.  Accordingly,  the  party,  standing  outside 
the  legal  organization  in  the  United  States,  occupies  in  England 
a  more  definite  legal  position  and  is  more  thoroughly  in  accord 
with  the  form  of  government.  The  continued  existence  of  two 
parties  in  the  House  of  Commons  led  gradually  to  the  principle 
of  cabinet  responsibility.  Ministers,  at  first  responsible  as  indi- 
viduals, came  to  realize  that  success  depended  upon  consistent 
parliamentary  support,  and  that  greater  security  resulted  from 
presenting  a  united  front,  standing  or  falling  together.  The 
Opposition  learned  that  their  chances  of  attaining  to  power  were 
increased  by  the  same  procedure,  and  this  organized  rivalry  in 
turn  strengthened  the  parties.  As  a  result  the  party  forms  an 
integral  part  of  the  English  national  system.  The  majority  in  the 


POLITICAL  PARTIES 


301 


House  of  Commons,  acting  under  the  guidance  of  the  party 
leaders,  controls  the  government.  Because  of  this  harmonious 
relation  between  government  and  party  there  is  no  need  that  the 
national  parties  maintain  strong  organization  in  local  areas.  Con- 
sequently England  is  spared  many  of  the  evils  of  overorganization 
prevalent  in  American  local  government. 

Several  serious  objections  may  be  raised  to  party  government  as 
developed  in  England.  Its  successful  operation  depends  upon 
the  continued  existence  of  only  two  parties.  If  a  strong  third  party 
arises,  or  if  parties  split  up  into  numerous  groups,  the  administra- 
tion, dependent  upon  temporary  coalition,  becomes  weak  and  its 
tenure  is  made  unstable.  The  English  system  also  involves  the 
enforced  absence  from  public  life  of  some  of  her  best  administra- 
tors. The  leaders  of  the  Opposition,  no  matter  how  able  or 
experienced,  are  debarred  from  public  service  until  their  party 
secures  a  parliamentary  majority.  Besides,  the  Opposition  is  not 
always  genuine.  Desirous  of  ousting  its  opponents,  it  naturally 
assumes  an  attitude  of  criticism,  regardless  of  the  merits  of  the 
question  at  issue,  often  delaying  or  preventing  the  passage  of 
measures  necessary  for  public  welfare.  Even  within  the  party, 
issues  are  not  decided  solely  on  their  merits,  since  the  necessity 
of  supporting  the  policy  of  the  party  as  a  whole  involves  com- 
promises, resuiting  in  certain  limitations  on  personal  freedom  of 
opinion  and  action. 

The  existing  political  parties  represented  in  the  English  Parlia- 
ment are  four  in  number.  The  two  major  parties,  Liberals  and 
Conservatives,1  while  maintaining,  in  general,  their  respective 
traditions  of  progress  and  order,  differ  on  few  essential  points. 
Broadly  speaking,  the  tendencies  of  the  Liberals  are  more  demo- 
cratic, more  interested  in  internal  than  in  foreign  affairs,  and  more 
favorable  to  the  laboring  classes  and  to  local  government.  They 
are  also  supported  by  the  Nonconformists  in  religion.  The  Con- 
servatives have  more  respect  for  existing-  in^ji-i it-ions  ;  they  have 
usually  favored  an  aggressive  foreign  policy  ;  and  they  strongly 
support  the  interests  of  the  Church  of  England,  of  the  landowners, 
and  of  the  liquor  sellers.  These  general  tendencies,  however,  show 

1  Now  often  called  the  National  Unionists. 


302          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

many  exceptions  during  the  last  forty  years,  the  stress  of  party 
rivalry  often  uprooting  established  party  principles. 

The  minor  parties,  the  Irish  Nationalists  and  the  Labor  party, 
have  more  definite  purposes.  The  former  aims  at  the  separate 
welfare  of  the  Irish  people.  Favoring  the  abolition  of  coercion 
acts,  the  transfer  of  land  from  large  holders  to  the  farmers,  and 
especially  Irish  home  rule,  they  form  temporary  alliances  with 
any  party  that  will  give  assistance,  never  losing  sight  of  their 
main  objects.  The  Labor  party  aims  at  legislation  favorable  to 
the  working  classes ;  wider  democracy,  including  woman  suffrage ; 
local  option  for  liquor  selling ;  and  the  application  of  various  so- 
cialistic principles. 

3.  France.  Political  parties  in  continental  Europe  take  the  form 
of  numerous  and  constantly  shifting  groups,  having  few  traditions 
and  little  real  power.  Since  no  group  is  strong  enough  to  control 
all  the  others,  a  dangerous  sense  of  irresponsibility  results  and 
government  is  carried  on  by  the  temporary  coalition  of  those 
groups  that  have  common  interests  or  expect  mutual  benefits. 
This  condition  is  particularly  distressing  in  France,  whose  govern- 
ment is  based  on  the  cabinet  system,  presupposing  two  strong 
parties  ;  and  which  has  adopted  the  principle  of  election,  even  in 
choosing  its  executive  head.  The  difficult  position  of  the  French 
president  and  the  instability  of  ministries  in  France  are  notorious. 
At  present  there  are  a  half  dozen  or  more  major  party  groups, 
with  minor  subdivisions.  Nationalists  and  Conservatives  represent 
the  reorganized  monarchial  parties.  Republicans  shade  off  through 
varying  degrees  of  radicalism  to  socialism.  The  moderates,  known 
as  Government  Republicans,  supported  by  various  coalitions, 
usually  form  the  ministries.  Other  groups  are  known  as  Prog- 
ressist Republicans,  Radical  Republicans,  Socialist  Radicals, 
and  Socialists. 

Several  causes  for  the  subdivisions  in  French  parties  may  be 
stated.1  There  is  a  general  lack  of  political  consensus.  Ever  since 
the  French  Revolution  parties  opposed  to  the  form  of  government 
have  existed,  and  each  radical  change  in  party  has  caused  a  rev- 
olution in  the  organization  of  the  state.  Surviving  from  the  old 

1  Lowell,  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe,  Vol.  I,  pp.  101-137. 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  303 

regime  are  the  monarchist  supporters  of  the  Bourbons,  and  from 
the  two  Empires  come  the  partisans  of  the  Bonapartes.  Both  of 
these  "  irreconcilables "  oppose  the  republic,  whose  supporters, 
though  now  largely  in  the  majority,  are  divided  among  themselves. 
French  political  thinking  is  theoretical  rather  than  practical.  In 
pursuing  impossible  ideals  of  government  separate  groups,  having 
different  ideals,  refuse  to  combine  for  the  purpose  of  making  the 
best  of  existing  conditions  on  the  basis  of  compromise.  Lack  of 
party  organization  prevents  party  unity.  In  France  party  contests 
are  local  rather  than  national,  and  personal  rather  than  political. 
Besides,  several  features  in  French  institutions  intensify  party 
divisions.  The  practice  of  requiring  an  absolute  majority  for 
election  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  1  encourages  all  groups  to 
nominate  candidates  for  the  first  ballot  and  then  make  the  best 
bargains  possible  with  the  leading  candidates  for  the  second.  The 
haphazard  system  of  choosing  committees  in  the  Chamber2  and 
the  frequent  changes  in  their  make-up  prevent  cabinet  control  over 
legislation,  especially  over  finance,  and  is  inconsistent  with  the 
principles  of  party  government.  Finally,  the  practice  of  addressing 
interpellations3  to  the  ministers,  followed  by  debate  and  vote, 
makes  ministries  unstable,  since  they  often  resign  when  defeated 
on  trivial  questions,  and  stirs  up  a  hostile  spirit  between  Ministry 
and  Chamber. 

As  a  result  of  the  party  situation  in  France  all  ministries 
are  coalition  ministries,  short-lived  and  weak.  Their  members  are 
rivals  rather  than  colleagues ;  hence  their  policy  is  inconsistent  and 
halting.  A  change  of  ministry  does  not  mean  a  change  of  party, 
but  of  individuals  ;  hence  members  of  the  cabinet  have  less  interest 
in  its  strength,  since,  if  defeated,  they  stand  a  good  chance  of  mem- 
bership in  the  next  cabinet.  Finally,  the  cabinet,  not  supported  by 
a  permanent  and  faithful  majority  in  the  Chamber,  must  maintain 
its  temporary  support  by  granting  privileges,  by  distributing  offices, 
and  by  currying  favor  with  the  deputies  and  their  constituents. 
In  France,  because  of  its  highly  centralized  administration,  the 
fondness  of  its  people  for  strong  rulers,  and  their  attachment  to 
persons  rather  than  to  issues,  a  presidential  form  of  government 
1  See  section  94.  2  See  section  104.  8  See  section  no. 


304          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

would  probably  develop  into  a  monarchy.  If  the  republic  is  to 
remain,  — and  the  declining  strength  of  the  monarchial  groups 
points  in  that  direction, —  it  seems  inevitable  that  cabinet  govern- 
ment must  be  maintained.  To  work  this  effectively,  two  strong 
parties,  with  stable  organizations,  should  be  developed,  and  con- 
siderable progress  in  this  direction  has  recently  been  made. 

4.  Germany.  In  Germany,  as  in  France,  a  number  of  party 
groups  are  found.  This  condition  was  not  troublesome  under  the 
empire,  when  the  government  was  held  together  by  a  strong 
hereditary  executive,  instead  of  by  a  weak  ministry,  and  when  the 
appointive  composition  of  the  upper  houses  and  the  class  system 
of  voting  served  as  checks  on  popular  control.  Under  these  con- 
ditions parties  served  as  restraining  rather  than  as  directing  forces. 
Under  the  present  republic,  however,  the  numerous  groups,  as  in 
France,  compel  coalition  ministries,  and  make  difficult  consistent 
and  responsible  party  leadership  and  unity. 

Several  causes  for  party  subdivision  in  Germany  may  be  given.1 
The  lack  of  homogeneity  in  the  German  population  prevents  any] 
large  number  from  acting  together,  and  forms  parties  on  hori-i 
zontal  class  lines  rather  than  on  vertical  cleavages  of  differences 
of  opinion.   The  intense  individualism  of  the  Germans  also  chafes 
under  party  subordination  or  discipline.    Besides,  it  was  the  delib- 
erate policy  of  the   former  government  to  prevent  any  party's 
growing  too  powerful,  and  party  divisions  were  fomented  and  one 
party  played  against  another  for  the  purpose  of  strengthening  the 
hands  of  the  government.    Governmental  control  of  the  press  has 
limited  it  as  an  effective  organ  of  public  opinion,  and  has  prevented 
the  cementing  of  party  ideas  on  public  issues.-  Second  elections: 
in  Germany,  as  in  France,  tend  to  destroy  parties,  since  many 
must  vote  for  candidates  in  whom  they  have  no  interest,  or  must 
abstain  from  voting.    Finally,  lack  of  responsibility  and  organiza- . 
tion  prevents  strong  parties.    Ministers  are  not  responsible  to  the  \ 
parties,  offices  are  not  filled  on  party  lines,  and  the  loose  system 
of  organization  gives  no  effective  working  machine. 

There  are  at  present  about  a  dozen  distinct  parties  represented 
in  the  Reichstag.  Of  these  the  most  important  are  the  Majority 

1  Lowell,  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe,  Vol.  II,  pp.  46-52.  j 


POLITICAL  PARTIES 


305 


Socialists,  the  Independent  Socialists,  the  Christian  People's 
Party,  the  National  People's  Party,  and  the  German  People's 
Party.  The  socialist  parties  control  the  government  at  present. 
The  Christian  People's  Party  is  the  Catholic  group  formerly 
known  as  the  Center;  the  National  People's  Party  is  the  old 
conservative  group  ;  and  the  German  People's  Party  is  the  former 
liberal  group.  While  party  lines  shift  rapidly,  the  general  tendency 
has  been,  as  formerly,  toward  a  strengthening  of  the  two  extremes, 
the  revolutionary  on  the  one  hand,  the  reactionary  on  the  other. 

121.  Party  organization.  The  form  of  party  organization 
depends  largely  on  the  nature  and  amount  of  work  that  the  party 
must  perform,  and  on  the  legal  position  of  the  party  in  the  govern- 
ing system.  Broadly  speaking,  three  main  types  of  party  organ- 
ization may  be  distinguished : 

1.  In  continental  Europe.   With  the  exception  of  the  Socialists, 
and,  to  a  degree,  the  Clericals,  national  party  organization  does 
not  exist  in  Europe.    In  France  electoral  campaigns  are  carried 
on  separately  in  each  district,  with  little  regard  to  other  districts. 
Each  candidate  draws  up  his  own  platform  and  confines  his  efforts 
to  his  own  constituency.    Only  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  can 
party  groups  be  said  to  exist ;  and,  while  political  meetings  or  ban- 
quets are  held  from  time  to  time,  emphasis  is  laid  on  creeds  and 
principles,  not  on  organized  machinery.    Parties  exist  in  name,  held 
together  in  a  sort  of  tacit  understanding  by  similarity  in  political 
ideals  rather  than  by  outward  association.    In  Germany,  likewise, 
party  organization,  excepting  that  of  the  Social  Democrats  and  the 
Center,  is  confined  to  clubs  composed  of  deputies  in  the  Reichstag, 
and  within  these  vigorous  disputes  are  often  carried  on  and  con- 
certed action  is  by  no  means  assured. 

2.  In  England.    Here  the  area  to  be  covered  is  comparatively 
small,  and  the  number  of  elections  and  of  offices  filled  by  election 
is  not  extensive.    The  custom  of  frequent  reelection  and  the  fact 
that  parliamentary  candidates  need  not  reside  in  their  constituencies 
diminish  the  importance  of  nominations.    Besides,  the  cabinet  sys- 
tem, bringing  the  two  main  departments  of  government  into  har- 
mony, removes  that  burden  from  the  political  parties.    Accordingly 
a  completely  organized  party  machinery  is  unnecessary,  and  any 


306         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

degree  of  national  organization  is  of  recent  growth.    In  the  National 
Liberal  Federation  and  the  National  Conservative  Union  each  party 
has  a  central  organization,  with  headquarters  in  London.    The  lead- 
ers of  each  party,  usually  holding  office  in  Parliament  or  in  the 
cabinet,   virtually  dictate  the   policy  of   the   party,  and  in  their 
addresses  or  "  open  letters  "  formulate  its  platform.    In  each  vot 
ing  district  of  a  parliamentary  constituency  local  affiliations  of  th 
central  organization  are  found.    The  leaders  of  these  local  unit 
aim  to  control  their  districts  and  harmonize  their  policy  with  tha 
of  the  national  leaders.    Delegates  from  these  districts  form  th 
party  council  of  the  constituency  ;'  delegates  from  the  constituencie 
form  the  party  council  of  the  county  or  borough ;  and  delegate 
from  these  units  form  the  national  party  organization  in  London 
Ancillary  organizations,  which  make  no  effort  to  control  the  polic 
of  the  parties,  but  give  attention  to  promoting  their  interests,  in 
elude  the  Central  Offices  of  each  party,  —  really  sort  of  permanen 
executive  committees  that  distribute  political  literature,  recommenc 
names  to  constituencies  in  search  of  candidates,  and  aid  in  election 
expenses.    Numerous  party  clubs  utilize  this  side  of  English  social 
life  to  distribute  party  opinions.    The  Irish  Nationalists  and  the 
Labor  party  have  their  own  organizations,  but  as  yet  these  have 
had  no  direct  bearing  upon  the  actual  working  of  English  party 
government. 

3.  In  the  United  States.  The  important  functions  performed 
by  the  parties,  together  with  the  fact  that  they  exist  outside  the 
legal  organization  of  the  state,  have  compelled  them  to  develop 
in  the  United  States  a  complex  and  highly  organized  machinery, 
centralized  over  the  entire  national  area  and  extending  its  branches 
into  the  smallest  local  units.  Each  party  is  held  together  by  a 
series  of  committees  and  conventions.  In  the  smallest  local  dis- 
tricts a  "primary"  or  "caucus,"  composed  of  the  voters  of  the 
party  in  that  district,  selects  the  local  committee,  makes  nomina- 
tions for  local  offices,  and  sends  delegates  to  the  party  meeting 
held  in  the  next  larger  unit.  This  meeting,  or  "  convention," 
chooses  a  committee,  makes  nominations  for  office  in  the  district, 
and  sends  delegates  to  the  state  convention.  This  body,  in  turn, 
chooses  members  for  a  state  committee,  makes  nominations  for 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  307 

commonwealth  offices,  and  sends  delegates  to  the  national  conven- 
tion.1 The  national  convention,  held  once  in  four  years,  wields  the 
ultimate  authority  of  the  party.  It  draws  up  the  party  platform, 
makes  nominations  for  president  and  vice  president,  and  selects  the 
national  committee,  composed  of  one  member  from  each  common- 
wealth. The  national  convention  of  each  party  consists  of  twice 
as  many  delegates  from  each  commonwealth  as  it  has  members  in 
Congress,  together  with  delegates  from  outlying  dependencies.  In 
selecting  delegates  two  are  chosen  from  each  congressional  district 
and  four  from  the  commonwealth  at  large.  In  nominating  presi- 
dential candidates  the  Republican  convention  requires  only  a  major- 
ity vote,  while  the  Democratic  convention  demands  a  two-thirds 
majority.  In  the  Republican  convention  the  delegates  from  a  com- 
monwealth may  vote  as  individuals  for  different  candidates ;  in  the 
Democratic  convention  the  entire  vote  of  a  commor  wealth  must  be 
cast  as  a  unit  for  the  same  candidate. 

Most  of  the  actual  work  of  the  parties  is  done  by  the  standing 
committees.  They  fix  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  conven- 
tions and  arrange  much  of  the  work  of  the  convention  in  advance. 
They  raise  and  apportion  campaign  funds,  distribute  political  liter- 
ature, and  arrange  political  meetings.  During  the  actual  campaign 
it  is  their  duty,  aided  by  special  campaign  committees,  to  see  that 
a  large  party  vote  is  polled. 

This  system,  symmetrical  and  centralized,  was  developed  gradu- 
ally. The  original  method  of  nominating  candidates  for  national 
office  was  by  a  caucus  of  the  party  leaders  in  Congress.  This  plan 
broke  down  in  1824,  and  was  followed  by  the  nomination  of 
"  favorite  sons  "  by  commonwealth  legislatures.  Later  this  clumsy 
system  was  replaced  by  the  national  party  convention,  made  pos- 
sible by  improvements  in  transportation  and  made  desirable  by 
growing  national  spirit  and  the  theory  of  popular  sovereignty. 
Since  1840  both  parties  have  regularly  held  national  conventions, 
and  since  the  Civil  War  the  present  elaborate  party  machinery  has 
been  perfected.  Efforts  are  now  being  made  to  weaken  party 
organization  and  to  vest  more  power  in  the  people  as  a  whole. 

1  Some  delegates  to  the  national  convention  are  sent  directly  from  conventions 
in  the  congressional  districts. 


308          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Political  parties  arose  as  voluntary  associations  of  individuals, 
uniting  or  disbanding  at  pleasure ;  and  in  most  states,  in  spite  of 
the  important  political  functions  that  they  now  perform,  political 
parties  are  not  legally  established  as  regular  organs  of  government 
or  even  as  corporations.  Yet  no  social  organization,  performing 
functions  of  general  importance,  especially  of  a  political  nature, 
can  entirely  escape  governmental  regulation ;  and  as  parties  devel- 
oped they  received  legal  recognition.  "  The  state  as  a  rule  speci- 
fies the  time,  place,  and  manner  of  conducting  elections,  and  in 
some  of  the  American  commonwealths  even  regulates  the  primary 
or  caucus.  It  may  regulate  the  system  of  nominations,  fix  the  form 
of  the  ballot,  and  provide  officers  to  supervise  the  polls  and  to 
count  the  ballots.  It  may  even  bear  the  expense  of  conducting 
primaries  and  the  polls,  and  may  legislate  against  corruption  and 
bribery  and  limit  the  amount  of  legitimate  expenses.  By  law  it 
defines  what  persons  may  exercise  suffrage  privileges  at  the  polls, 
and  may  also  define  suffrage  rights  at  the  primary.  Voting  has  even 
been  made  compulsory  in  certain  communities,  but  with  small 
success."  1 

122.  Party  reform.  Aside  from  unquestioned  evils  in  the  actual 
working  of  political  parties  in  modern  states,  considerable  differ- 
ence of  opinion  exists  as  to  the  merits  of  the  party  system  itself. 
Its  opponents  claim  that  the  existence  of  several  great  organiza- 
tions, within  which  there  is  substantial  agreement  on  questions  of 
governmental  policy,  is  contrary  to  the  psychology  of  human  nature. 
People  are  not  divided  into  a  few  great  groups,  but  hold  all  shades 
and  combinations  of  opinion.  Party  agreement  is  therefore  arti- 
ficial, based  on  prejudice  rather  than  on  sound  judgment.  It  is 
further  claimed  that  the  party  system  is  opposed  to  democracy,  that 
party  control  suppresses  those  individual  opinions  and  actions  that 
are  the  very  essence  of  free  government,  and  that  it  is  a  device  for 
preventing  the  expression  of  general  will,  obscuring  public  opinion, 
and  setting  up  a  new  form  of  despotism.  Besides,  since  parties 
grow  up  as  extralegal  organizations  outside  the  regular  machinery 
of  the  state,  they  tend  to  be  irresponsible  and  uncontrolled,  and 
offer  opportunity  for  "  boss  rule,"  corruption,  and  misgovernment. 

1  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  p.  284. 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  309 

To  these  accusations  the  supporters  of  the  party  system  reply  as 
follows.  The  existence  of  several  large  groupings  of  opinion  is 
necessary,  since  minor  differences  must  be  subordinated  to  general 
agreement  on  questions  of  paramount  importance.  Moreover,  such 
broad  grouping  is  not  artificial.  People  fall  naturally  into  four 
groups  :  reactionaries,  who  desire  to  return  to  past  methods  and 
institutions ;  conservatives,  who  desire  to  maintain  the  status  quo; 
liberals,  who  aim  at  progress  through  reforming  existing  methods 
and  expanding  existing  institutions ;  and  radicals,  who  would  destroy 
present  conditions  and  set  up  a  new  order  of  things.  In  practice 
the  former  two  act  together  in  opposition  to  the  latter  two.  As 
examples,  the  two  parties  of  Great  Britain,  and  the  distinction  in 
the  United  States  between  the  progressive,  liberal-construction 
party  and  the  conservative,  strict-construction  party  are  cited. 
Further,  it  is  claimed  that  political  parties  are  not  inconsistent  with 
democracy  ;  that,  on  the  contrary,  they  offer  the  only  way  to  secure 
a  stable  and  consistent  popular  government,  and  to  enable  the 
majority  to  express  its  will.  Finally,  political  parties,  in  growing 
up  outside  the  ordinary  framework  of  the  state,  enable  govern- 
mental change  to  take  place  as  public  opinion  changes,  without 
disturbing  the  whole  political  machinery.  They  thus  serve  as  a 
sort  of  balance  wheel  to  the  constitutional  system,  maintaining 
the  adjustment  among  the  parts  in  the  system  and  the  relation 
of  the  system  as  a  whole  to  the  motive  force  that  operates  it. 

It  is  in  the  United  States,  where  parties  are  powerful  and  highly 
organized,  that  the  evils  of  party  government  are  most  conspicuous 
and  that  reform  is  most  needed.  The  causes  of  this  condition  are 
complex  and  closely  interrelated,  and  can  only  be  suggested  here. 
The  American  system  of  decentralized  administration  and  the 
large  number  of  officials  elected  for  short  terms  have  given  the 
parties  control  over  the  numerous  unrelated  officials.  This  has  led 
to  the  spoils  system,  by  which  governmental  positions  are  looked 
upon  as  a  proper  reward  for  party  service.  Civil-service  reform 
and  further  centralization  in  administration  promise  to  be  effective 
remedies.  It  is  also  believed  by  many  that  fewer  elected  officers 
and  longer  terms,  making  possible  a  shorter  and  simpler  ballot, 
would  increase  intelligent  and  active  interest  in  elections. 


310         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  irresponsibility  of  the  party,  due  to  its  Iggal  position  in  the 
American  constitutional  system,  is  largely  responsible  for  its  over- 
organization  and  for  the  growth  of  the  "  machine  "  and  "  boss."  It 
is,  of  course,  evident  that  party  organization  is  necessary,  and  that 
a  comparatively  small  number  of  persons  must  control  the  routine 
of  party  action.  Such  machinery  becomes  dangerous  only  when 
it  assumes  the  sole  right  to  select  candidates,  prevents  the  real 
wishes  of  the  majority  of  the  party,  and  uses  its  powers  for 
selfish  or  improper  ends.  The  American  political  system  makes 
little  provision  for  real  leadership ;  and  the  ordinary  voters,  little 
interested  and  unable  to  give  time  or  attention  to  the  mass  of  party 
work,  leave  the  actual  operation  of  party  organization  to  that  small 
group  of  "  politicians  "  known  as  the  "  machine,"  at  whose  head 
often  stands  the  "  boss."  Caucuses  and  conventions  are  composed 
of  their  henchmen,  prearranged  "slates"  take  the  place  of  nomina- 
tions, and,  through  punishment  of  political  opponents  and  rewards, 
direct  or  indirect,  to  political  followers,  the  unity  of  the  party  and 
the  power  of  the  machine  are  maintained. 

For  this  feudal  system  in  politics,  efficient  in  controlling  votes 
and  quite  natural  under  the  conditions  of  American  political  life, 
numerous  remedies  are  proposed.  Legal  recognition  of  the  party, 
by  which,  through  "primary  election  laws,"  all  party  members  are 
guaranteed  an  equal  voice  in  party  management,  and  by  which 
responsible  party  leadership  may  be  developed,  accomplishes  much. 
The  system  of  "  direct  nomination,"  in  which  nomination  by  party 
caucus  is  replaced  by  a  preliminary  election  for  the  purpose  of 
selecting  candidates,  receives  support  in  some  quarters.  There  is 
always  the  possibility  that  voters  may  shake  off  their  lethargy  and 
take  an  active  interest  in  public  affairs,  or  even  that  independent 
parties  may  be  formed  if  the  personal  government  of  the  machine 
grows  too  burdensome. 

Another  evil  in  the  American  system  is  the  connection  between 
*  national  and  local  politics.  While  national  issues  differ  materially 
from  those  in  the  commonwealths,  and  these  in  turn  differ  from 
those  in  cities  or  local  districts,  the  national  organization  of  the 
parties  permeates  all  areas  and  controls  all  elections.  The  need  for 
organization,  to  which  purpose  the  local  units  are  best  adapted, 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  311 

thus  subordinates  local  issues  to  party  unity,  and  local  patronage 
is  used  as  a  reward  for  party  service.  Recent  attempts  to  separate 
national  and  local  issues  have  met  with  fair  success,  especially  in 
the  larger  cities,  and  local  elections  have  been  fought  out  on  local 
issues.  A  suggested  remedy  of  holding  national  and  local  elections 
on  separate  days  has  the  advantage  of  emphasizing  the  different 
questions  at  issue,  but  the  disadvantage  of  increasing  the  number 
of  our  already  numerous  elections. 

Probably  the  chief  danger  in  American  politics  is  the  close  con- 
nection with  business  interests,  resulting  in  the  " graft"  evil.    For 
this  purpose  boss  rule  in  the  party  and  the  corporate  form  of  busi- 
ness organization  offer  convenient  points  of  contact.    Corporations 
desire  favorable  legislation  or  public  franchises,  and  wish  to  avoid 
taxation.    The  politicians  in  control  of  the  party  desire  the  support 
of  corporation  influence  or  financial  contributions  to  the  "  campaign 
fund."    Besides,  the  irresponsibility  of  party  leaders  and  the  lack 
of  publicity  concerning  corporation  finance  offer  opportunity  for 
improper  relations.    Governmental  regulation  of  political  parties,^ 
so  as  to  secure  responsible  leadership,  and  governmental  regula-, 
tion  of  corporations,  so  as  to  secure  publicity  concerning  corpora-' 
tion  methods,  together  with  higher  ideals  of  political  and  business^ 
morality,  are  needed. 

In  a  recent  book  1  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  fact  that  political 
rights,  upon  which  chief  emphasis  has  heretofore  been  laid  in  the 
United  States,  imply  corresponding  political  duties  ;  and  that  such 
rights  are  not  private  property,  with  which  a  man  may  do  as  he 
chooses,  but  that  they  imply  public  responsibilities  and  duties  to 
other  individuals  and  to  the  state.  The  essentials  of  that  political 
morality  upon  which  alone  government  by  the  people  can  be 
based  with  safety  to  national  life,  are  stated  as  follows : 

I .  Intelligence.  Ignorance  and  freedom  are  contradictory  terms. 
Evils  in  government  can  be  exposed  or  removed,  and  the  exercise 
of  universal  suffrage  made  safe  only  when  citizens  are  politically 
educated.  Hence  advanced  states  provide  public  education,  and 
true  citizens  aim  to  promote  rather  than  to  prevent  a  general 
knowledge  of  governmental  issues  and  methods, 
i  Woodburn,  Political  Parties  and  Party  Problems  in  the  United  States,  chap.  xiv. 


312          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

2.  Political  virtue.    Moral  character  is  the  foundation  of  the 
state.    "It  is  this  that  gives  the  citizen  devotion  and  sacrifice  for 
war,  courage  in  battle,  insight  and  boldness  in  leadership,  and  the 
manly  independence  to  enable  him  to  withstand  the  wiles  and 
seductions  of  the  corruptionist." 

3.  Freedom.    Citizens  must  not  be  restrained  by  power,   nor 
too  much  bound  by  party,  nor  controlled  by  private  interest.   This 
involves  free  speech,  free  assembly,  free  petition,  and  free  ballot. 
The  chief  danger  at  present  in  the   United  States  is  from  the 
powerful  industrial  and  commercial  interests,  which  often  try  to 
control,  directly  or  indirectly,  these  free  institutions,  and,  by  pre- 
venting the  economic  independence  of  the  laboring  classes,  make 
impossible  real  political  freedom. 

4.  Patriotism.    Citizens  should  be  public-spirited  and   should 
take   an   active    interest    in    political    affairs.    The    essentials    of 
patriotism  have  been  summarized  as  follows  : 1 

(a)  An  intelligent  knowledge  of  what  is  best  for  one's  country 
as  a  whole. 

(b)  The  placing  of  the  country's   interest  above  party,  class, 
sectional,  or  selfish  interest. 

(c)  The  willingness  of  service  and  of  sacrifice  for  the  welfare 
of  one's  country. 

1  James  Bryce,  in  The  Forum,  Vol.  XV. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XXII 

REFERENCES 

RELATION  OF  LOCAL  TO  CENTRAL  GOVERNMENT 

1.  ACCORDING  TO  FUNCTION 

2.  ACCORDING  TO  GOVERNMENTAL  POSITION 

COMMONWEALTH  GOVERNMENTS 

1.  IN  SWITZERLAND 

2.  IN  GERMANY 

3.  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

RURAL  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

1.  GENERAL  DIVISIONS 

a.  As  to  local  area 

b.  As  to  local  organization  and  relation  to  central  govern- 

ment 

2.  ORGANIZATION 

a.  In  France 

b.  In  Germany 

c.  In  England     - 

d.  In  the  United  States 

(1)  The  town  system 

(2)  The  county  system 

(3)  The  mixed  system 
HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  CITIES 

1.  GROWTH  OF  CITIES 

a.  Ancient 

b.  Medieval 

c.  Modern 

2.  CAUSES  OF  RECENT  INCREASE 

a.  Improved  sanitary  conditions 


b.  Development  of  transportation 

c.  Use  of  machinery  and  -artificial  power 

d.  Development  of  secondary  pursuits 

e.  Extension  of  governing  authority 


314         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT 

1.  POLITICAL  POSITION  OF  CITY 

a.  As  city  state 

b.  As  administrative  district 

c.  As  local  government 

2.  INTERNAL  ORGANIZATION 

a.  The  share  of  the  people  in  city  government 

(1)  Municipal  suffrage 

(2)  Elective  officers 

(3)  Direct  popular  government 

b.  The  city  council 

c.  The  city  executive 

MUNICIPAL  REFORM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

1.  POSITION  OF  MAYOR  AND  COUNCIL 

2.  THE  "  COMMISSION  PLAN  " 

MUNICIPAL  ACTIVITIES 

1.  PUBLIC  HEALTH  AND  SAFETY 

2.  CHARITIES  AND  CORRECTION 

3.  EDUCATION 

4.  MUNICIPAL  IMPROVEMENTS 

a.  Supported  by  taxation 

b.  Supported  by  fees 

5.  MUNICIPAL  FINANCE 


CHAPTER  XXII 

LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  vii 

EATON,  D.  B.  The  Government  of  Municipalities 

FAIRLIE,  J.  A.  Local  Government  in  the  United  States 

FAIRLIE,  J.  A.  Municipal  Administration 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  City  Government  in  the  United  States 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  Ill 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Municipal  Government 

GOODNOW,  F.  J.  Municipal  Problems 

HART,  A.  B.  Actual  Government,  Parts  III-IV 

JENKS,  E.  An  Outline  of  English  Local  Government 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  Part  II,  chap,  vii 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  Governments   and  Parties   in  Continental   Europe,  Vol.  I,  pp. 

36-43,  286-377 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  The  Government  of  England,  Vol.  II,  chaps,  xxxviii-xlvi 
McCLAiN,  E.  Constitutional  Law  in  the  United  States,  Part  VI 
MUNRO,  W.  B.  The  Government  of  European  Cities 
SHAW,  A.  Municipal  Government  in  Continental  Europe 
SHAW,  A.  Municipal  Government  in  Great  Britain 
SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chap,  xxv 
SMITH,  J.  A.  The  Spirit  of  American  Government,  chap,  x 
STATESMAN'S  YEAR-BOOK 

WILCOX,  D.  F.  The  Study  of  City  Government 
WILSON,  W.  The  State,  pp.  235-242,  275-298,  402-428,  469-523 
ZUEBLIN,  C.  American  Municipal  Progress 

123.  Relation  of  local  to  central  government.  Ordinarily  the 
territory  of  a  state  is  so  large  that  it  must  be  divided  for  effective 
administration.  Hence,  in  addition  to  the  organs  of  national  gov- 
ernment, whose  authority  extends  over  the  entire  state,  attention 
must  be  given  to  those  governing  bodies  whose  jurisdiction  extends 
over  only  part  of  its  area, —  to  their  relation  to  the  central  govern- 
ment, their  organization,  and  the  functions  that  they  perform. 
Sometimes  the  state  creates  these  divisions  artificially  for  purposes 
of  convenient  government ;  sometimes  they  are  historic  survivals 
of  political  units, —  of  independent  states  or  local  communities 

315 


316          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

whose  existence  antedates  that  of  the  state  of  which  they  now 
form  a  part. 

The  principles  upon  which  governmental  division  is  based  are 
complex.  Area  and  population,  while  important,  are  secondary  to 
considerations  of  political  expediency,  natural  influences,  and  past 
history.  In  most  states  four  grades  of  local  division  are  found : l 

1 .  The  primary  divisions  of  a  state  frequently  represent  earlier 
states  whose  independent  existence  was  merged  into  a  larger  whole. 
Such  were  the  provinces  of  the  Roman  Empire,  and  such  are 
the  commonwealths  of  the  United  States,  the  commonwealths  and 
free  cities  of  the  German  republic,  and  the  major  divisions  of 
Great  Britain.   The  provinces  of  France  were  abolished  during  the 
French  Revolution.    These  divisions  enjoy  considerable  govern- 
mental independence,  and  in  some  states,  Germany  and  the  United 
States  for  example,  have  legislative  bodies  of  their  own. 

2.  The  next  divisions,  while  often  having  certain  historic  or 
geographic  reasons  for  existence,  are  mainly  created  for  govern- 
mental purposes.    As  examples  may  be  mentioned  the  counties  of 
England  and  the  United  States,  the  German  Kreise?  and  the 
French  departments. 

3.  The  next  divisions,  usually  having  corporate  existence,  with 
subordinate  administration  and  jurisdiction,  are  represented  by  the 
Teutonic  hundreds,  the  cantons  of  France,  the  Kreise  of  Prussia, 
and  the  townships  in  most  parts  of  the  United  States. 

4.  The  ultimate  political  divisions  are  rural  and  urban  com- 
munities (communes,  Gemeinde,  towns,  cities).    Like  the  first  divi- 
sions, these  have  life  and  interests  of  their  own,  based  on  social 
and  economic  conditions,  and  form  important  governmental  units. 
Large  cities  sometimes  include  several  grades  of  governmental 
division. 

The  functions  performed  by  central  and  local  governments 
respectively  are  based  on  a  logical  distinction.  Some  state  activi- 
ties affect  the  welfare  of  all  citizens ;  some  public  works  are 
national  in  scope,  or  are  too  expensive  to  be  undertaken  by  the 
community  most  directly  benefited  ;  some  regulations  are  effective 

1  Bluntschli,  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  Ill,  chap.  vi. 

2  In  Prussia,  the  Resrierunvsbezirke. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  317 

only  if  uniform  over  the  entire  state.  Of  such  nature  are  the 
maintenance  of  national  defense  and  the  regulation  of  foreign 
affairs,  the  control  of  currency  and  the  operation  of  the  postal 
service,  and  the  general  institution  of  criminal  and  civil  law.  Ob- 
viously, such  functions  are  properly  performed  by  the  national 
organization.  Other  governmental  functions  affect  only  a  limited 
area,  and  it  is  advisable  that  such  activities  should  be  controlled 
and  their  cost  defrayed  by  those  who  benefit  by  them.  Of  such 
nature  are  the  regulation  of  water  supplies,  lighting  systems,  and 
local  transportation ;  the  maintenance  of  roads,  bridges,  hospitals, 
and  schools ;  and  protection  against  fire,  disease,  and  disorder. 
Many  functions,  however,  are  of  both  general  and  local  interest 
and  their  control  is  divided  between  central  and  local  agencies. 
Taxation  and  education  are  examples. 

While,  in  most  cases,  the  division  of  government  that  should 
properly  have  charge  of  a  given  function  is  evident,  many  difficul- 
ties are  met  in  actual  administration.  In  the  United  States  the 
commonwealths  control  the  ordinary  civil  and  criminal  law,  divorce, 
and  the  chartering  of  corporations.  Lack  of  uniformity  concerning 
these  has  caused  many  evils.  In  France  the  national  government 
controls  many  activities  of  purely  local  concern,  and  too  great  uni- 
formity results  in  injustice.  Besides,  the  question  as  to  whether 
national  functions  that  must  be  performed  in  local  areas  should  be 
undertaken  by  officials  of  the  national  government,  by  local  officials 
under  national  direction,  or  by  local  officials  under  local  control, 
opens  considerable  possibility  of  disagreement. 

The  chief  distinction  between  central  and  local  government  rests 
upon  their  legal  position  in  the  constitutional  system.  In  general 
it  may  be  stated  that  the  central  government  is  created  by  the 
constitution  and  cannot  be  modified  except  by  its  amendment; 
and  that  the  local  government  is  created  by  the  central  government 
and  may  be  changed  at  its  pleasure.  This  is  the  case  in  England, 
where  the  constitution  is  largely  unwritten,  and  in  Italy  and  France, 
under  written  constitutions.  Division  into  local  areas  and  the 
organization  of  local  government  are  controlled  by  the  national 
legislature.  However,  a  further  distinction  must  be  made  in  the 
case  of  federal  states.  Jn  the  United  States,  Germany,  and 


318          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Switzerland  the  commonwealths  are  established  by  the  constitution  ; 
and  their  governments,  when  acting  within  their  legal  powers,  are 
independent  of  the  central  authority  and  may  not  be  modified  or 
destroyed  by  it.  Some  method  of  securing  national  supremacy 
and  of  preventing  secession  or  disobedience  on  the  part  of  the 
component  commonwealths  is  usually  provided.  Accordingly,  com- 
monwealth governments  in  federal  states,  although  local  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  functions  they  perform  and  the  areas  over  which 
they  have  jurisdiction,  are  legally  fundamental  parts  of  the  national 
organization.  Subordinate  local  governments  in  a  federal  state  are 
created  by  the  commonwealth  governments,  or,  as  in  the  United 
States,  to  some  extent  by  the  commonwealth  constitutions.  Ob- 
viously, then,  the  area  and  population  of  a  governmental  unit  is  no 
indication  of  its  legal  position.  New  York  City,  with  a  population 
of  over  four  million,  is  a  mere  corporation,  created  by  a  common- 
wealth legislature ;  while  Nevada,  with  a  population  of  seventy- 
five  thousand,  is  an  integral  part  of  the  United  States.  Similarly, 
London  is  a  mere  creature  of  the  British  Parliament ;  while 
Liibeck,  with  less  than  one  fortieth  of  London's  population,  is  a 
self-governing  German  commonwealth. 

124.  Commonwealth  governments.  The  commonwealth  govern- 
ments of  federal  states  usually  exhibit,  on  a  smaller  scale,  the 
leading  features  of  the  national  organization.  This  is  natural,  since 
federal  states  are  usually  formed  by  the  union  of  formerly  inde- 
pendent states,  and  the  constitution  of  the  new  state  generalizes 
the  experience  of  its  component  units,  bearing  often  many  marks 
of  compromise.  Since  the  commonwealths  antedate  the  union, 
and  usually  retain  considerable  local  patriotism  and  some  distrust 
of  the  new  state,  which  is  formed  often  by  compulsion  or  neces- 
sity, it  is  also  natural  that  their  governments  should  retain  large 
powers  and  come  into  close  contact  with  the  ordinary  affairs  of 
their  citizens.  To  the  federal  government  is  delegated  control  over 
foreign  affairs  and  over  internal  interests  of  general  nature ;  al- 
though, as  time  emphasizes  the  advantages  of  union  and  dims  the 
remembrance  of  former  independence,  the  commonwealths  sink 
more  and  more  into  a  subordinate  position  in  the  constitutional 
system. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  319 

The  legal  position  and  governmental  organization  of  common- 
wealths in  leading  modern  federations  may  be  outlined  as  follows  : 

1.  Switzerland.    The  cantons  of   Switzerland  have  had  their 
own  separate  histories ;  they  exhibit  marked  differences  in  race, 
language,  and  religion ;  they  have  been  brought  into  union  only 
under  great  difficulties.  As  a  result  considerable  variety  of  organ- 
ization is  found,  yet,  in  essential  features,  their  governments  are 
similar.    Each  canton  has  a  legislative  body  composed  of  a  single 
House.   In  a  few  of  the  smaller  cantons  this  is  a  general  assembly 
of  all  qualified  voters ;    in  the  remainder  it  is  a  representative 
council  chosen  by  direct  popular  vote.    This  body,  in  addition  to 
its  legislative  powers,  also  supervises  the  administration  and  gives 
unity  to  all  governmental  functions.    The  executive  in  each  canton 
is  collegiate,  consisting  usually  of  five  to  seven  members.    These 
are  chosen  either  by  direct  popular  vote  or  by  the  legislature ;  and 
they  take  part  in  legislation  as  well  as  in  administration,  acting  as 
a  guiding  committee  of   the  lawmaking  body.    In  addition,   the 
people  of  each  canton  retain  a  direct  and  positive  control  over  the 
government,  the  initiative,  referendum,  and  popular  veto  being 
used  for  both  ordinary  legislation  and  constitutional  amendment. 

2.  Germany.    The  former  German  Empire  was  a  federal  state 
composed  of  four  kingdoms,  six  grand  duchies,  five  duchies,  seven 
principalities,  three  free  cities,  and  the  imperial  domain  of  Alsace- 
Lorraine.    The  king  of  Prussia  was  German  emperor,  and  the 
influence  of  Prussia  dominated  the  federation.   As  a  result  of  the 
World  War,  Alsace-Lorraine  was  ceded  to  France,  and  sections  of 
boundary  territory  were  transferred  to  Denmark,  Belgium,  Poland, 
Lithuania,  and  Czechoslovakia.    Besides,  a  number  of  the  smaller 
commonwealths  combined  into  larger  units,  notably  the  seven  Thu- 
ringian  duchies  and  principalities,  which  formed  themselves  into  a 
single  commonwealth  in  1919.    The  present  republic  is  composed 
of  eighteen  members,  including  the  three  free  cities  of  Hamburg, 
Lubeck,  and  Bremen.  The  former  hereditary  dynasties  have  been 
removed  and  republics  proclaimed  in  every  unit.    In  each,  chief 
authority  is  vested  in  a  popularly  elected  representative  legislature, 
usually  of  a  single  house,  although  Prussia  adds  an  upper  house,  or 
State  Council,  similar  to  the  Reichsrat  of  the  national  government. 


320          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  three  free  cities  each  have  a  Senate,  consisting  of  fourteen 
to  eighteen  members  elected  for  life,  which  exercises  executive 
power ;  and  a  House  of  Burgesses,  numbering  one  hundred  and 
twenty  to  one  hundred  and  sixty  members  elected  for  six  years, 
which  shares  in  legislative  power.  Burgomasters,  chosen  for  short 
terms,  preside  over  the  Senates  and  direct  the  administrations. 

The  new  republic  is  a  more  unitary  state  than  the  former 
federal  empire.  The  national  government  may  create  new  com- 
monwealths, change  commonwealth  boundaries,  enforce  national 
laws  that  conflict  with  commonwealth  laws,  and  use  arms  to  force 
commonwealths  to  perform  national  duties.  The  power  of  the 
national  government  in  taxation  has  been  largely  extended.  It  also 
has  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  foreign  relations,  colonial  affairs,  citi- 
zenship, immigration,  naturalization,  extradition,  national  defense, 
coinage,  customs,  postal  service,  telegraphs,  and  telephones. 

3.  The  United  States.  The  governments  of  the  forty-eight  com- 
monwealths reproduce  on  a  smaller  scale  the  national  government 
of  the  United  States.  Each  has  its  written  constitution,  although 
the  detailed  legislation  which  many  of  them  contain  is  in  striking 
contrast  to  the  brevity  of  the  federal  Constitution.  Each  common- 
wealth has  an  executive  head,  or  governor,  and  a  legislative  body 
of  two  houses.  All  of  these  are  elected  by  direct  popular  vote  for 
brief  terms.  The  administrative  departments  are  not  centralized 
under  the  control  of  the  governor,  but  are  distributed  among 
elected  and  appointed  officials,  together  with  numerous  boards  and 
commissions.  Administration,  therefore,  is  neither  harmonized  by 
common  subordination  to  a  single  executive  head,  as  in  the 
national  government  of  the  United  States,  nor  made  responsible 
to  the  majority  of  the  legislative  body,  as  in  the  parliamentary  gov- 
ernments of  England  and  France.  Each  commonwealth  has  also  a 
complete  system  of  courts,  whose  organization,  unregulated  by 
federal  law,  is  not  entirely  uniform.  In  most  commonwealths 
judges  are  elected  by  popular  vote  for  comparatively  short  terms. 

In  contrast  to  the  German  commonwealths,  whose  powers  may 
be  narrowed  by  the  national  legislature,  the  commonwealths  of  the 
United  States  retain  large  and  independent  functions,  guaranteed 
by  the  federal  Constitution.  Though  losing  ground  relatively  to  the 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  321 

growing  national  spirit,  the  commonwealths,  controlling  the  ordi- 
nary civil  and  criminal  law  and  performing  many  functions  for 
general  welfare,  come  into  contact  with  the  lives  of  the  majority 
of  citizens  at  many  points. 

125.  Rural  local  government.  Rural  local  government  is  distin- 
guished, on  the  one  hand,  from  national  government  or,  in  federal 
states,  from  commonwealth  government ;  and,  on  the  other,  from 
municipal  government,  which  is  the  organization  of  urban  political 
units.  In  two  respects  rural  government,  as  it  exists  in  modern 
states,  shows  striking  variations  : 

1.  As  to  local  areas.    Sometimes  local  governmental  districts 
represent  original  units  of  settlement,  whose  existence  antedates  that 
of  the  national  government ;  sometimes  they  are  created  artificially 
by  order  of  the  central  authority.    The  towns  of  New  England, 
the  French  communes,  and  the  English  parishes  are  examples  of 
the  former ;  the  counties  and  townships  of  the  newer  American 
commonwealths  and  the  departments  of  France  illustrate  the  latter. 
Accordingly  the  units  of  local  government,   even  of  the  same 
governmental  rank,  differ  greatly  in  size  and  in  population.    Some- 
times new  divisions  of  local  government  are  made  by  dividing  or 
combining  the  old  ;  sometimes  new  areas  are  created  for  new 
needs,  regardless  of  the  boundaries  of  other  local  divisions.    Hence 
the  regular  multiple  system  of  division,  which   prevails  in  the 
United  States  and  France,  by  which  minor  governmental  areas 
are  always  subdivisions  of  larger  units,  with  no  overlapping  of 
boundary  lines,  is  in  striking  contrast  to  the  irregular  local  divisions 
of  England,  where  new  areas  have  been  created  as  new  functions 
of  administration  demanded,  and,  until  recently,  boundary  lines 
intersected  and  overlapped  in  a  most  confusing  way. 

2.  As  to  local  organization  and  relation  to  central  government. 
The  general  nature  of  the  relation  of  local  to  central  organs  has 
already  been  outlined.  1  Functions  of  local  interest  may  be  admin- 
istered by  local  officials  or  by  agents  of  the  central  government. 
The  control  exercised  by  the  superior  government  over  local  inter- 
ests may  be  extensive  or  limited,  and  may  be  carried  on  through 
legislation  or  through   administration.    Broadly  considered,   two 

1  See  section  99. 


322          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

main  types  of  local  organization  may  be  distinguished.  The  first 
is  that  of  decentralization,  or,  as  it  is  commonly  known,  local 
self-government.  In  this  system  the  citizens  of  local  areas  are 
given  a  free  hand  in  administering  questions  of  local  concern 
through  elected  officials  responsible  only  to  voters  of  the  locality. 
This  type  of  local  government  exists  in  the  United  States  and,  in 
a  less  complete  form,  in  England.  The  other  system  is  that  of 
centralization,  in  which  local  interests  are  regulated  by  the  central 
government  through  officials  that  it  appoints  or  controls.  This 
type  of  local  government  exists  in  France  and,  with  modifications, 
in  the  German  republic. 

A  brief  statement  of  the  organization  and  governmental  func- 
tions of  rural  local  units  in  leading  modern  states  follows : 

i.  France.  For  purposes  of  local  administration  France  is 
divided  into  departments  ;  departments  are  divided  into  arrondisse- 
ments  ;  these  are  subdivided  into  cantons  ;  and  at  the  basis  of  the 
system  are  the  communes.  This  is  a  simple  and  symmetrical 
multiple  system  of  subdivision  except  for  the  communes,  which,  in 
a  few  instances,  as  in  the  case  of  Paris,  are  populous  enough  to 
contain  several  of  the  larger  divisions.  The  communes  alone  are 
historic  local  units,  the  remainder  being  artificial  administrative 
areas  created  by  the  Constituent  Assembly  in  1789. 

The  characteristic  feature  of  local  government  in  France  is  its 
highly  centralized  form.  Local  officials  are  dependent  upon  the 
central  authority ;  agents  of  the  national  government  are  found  in 
all  local  areas ;  and  the  discretionary  powers  delegated  to  local 
administration  are  few.  This  system  rests  on  a  deeply  rooted 
French  tradition  dating  back  to  the  old  regime.  The  Revolution 
at  first  extended  self-government  to  local  areas,  but  the  necessity 
of  maintaining  internal  order  and  of  waging  foreign  war  led  to 
a  reaction  under  Napoleon,  and  the  organization  then  established 
has  undergone  but  few  changes.  The  French  habit  of  depending 
upon  the  central  government,  their  dread  of  disorder,  the  artificial 
nature  of  the  local  divisions,  and  the  fear  on  the  part  of  the  exist- 
ing government  lest  local  units  serve  as  centers  of  revolt,  —  all 
prevent  any  considerable  extension  of  local  self-government.1 

1  Lowell,  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe,  Vol.  I,  pp.  35-36. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  323 

There  are  eighty-six  departments  in  France,1  comparatively  equal 
in  area  and  population.  At  the  head  of  each  is  a  prefect,  appointed 
by  the  president  on  the  recommendation  of  the  Minister  of  the 
Interior.  This  official  occupies  a  double  position.  He  is  the  agent 
of  the  central  government  for  affairs  of  general  admininistration, 
acting  sometimes  under  orders  from  the  ministers,  sometimes  on 
his  own  responsibility.  As  such  he  is  assisted  by  a  prefectorial 
council  whose  duties  are  mainly  advisory.  He  is  also  the  executive 
officer  for  local  affairs,  and  as  such  carries  out  the  resolutions  of 
the  General  Council,  the  elected  assembly  of  the  department.  The 
authority  of  this  body  is  limited  to  purely  local  affairs,  and  even 
over  these  its  control  is  not  absolute.  Its  resolutions  are  carried 
out  by  the  prefect,  primarily  an  agent  of  the  central  government, 
whose  powers  of  appointment  and  independent  authority,  especially 
over  finance,  give  him  considerable  control  over  its  acts.  In  ad- 
dition, the  council  is  permitted  to  sit  only  a  short  time  and  may 
be  dissolved  by  the  president  of  the  republic. 

The  arrondissements  and  cantons  are  mainly  convenient  admin- 
istrative districts.  The  former,  governed  by  a  subprefect  and  an 
elected  council,  are  electoral  districts  for  the  Chamber  of  Deputies. 
They  have  no  corporate  existence  and  no  property  or  revenues 
of  their  own.  The  latter,  with  no  organization  of  their  own,  are 
districts  for  judicial,  military,  and  electoral  purposes. 

The  communes,  some  of  which  are  urban  but  the  majority  rural, 
are  vital  local  organisms.  They  vary  in  population  from  mere 
hamlets  to  large  cities,  and  in  area  from  a  few  acres  to  several 
hundred  square  miles.  Except  for  Paris  and  Lyons  they  are  gov- 
erned on  the  same  plan.  Municipal  councils,  composed  of  ten  to 
thirty-six  members,  are  elected  in  each  commune,  with  authority 
over  local  affairs.  Many  of  their  acts  must  be  approved,  however, 
by  superior  administrative  officials.  From  among  its  own  members 
each  council  elects  a  mayor,  who  is  both  the  executive  head  of  the 
commune  and  the  agent  of  the  central  government.  In  the  latter 
capacity  he  acts  under  the  orders  of  the  prefect. 

2.   Germany.    Since  local  organization  is  not  uniform  in  all  the 

1  Eighty-seven,  if  the  territory  of  Belfort  be  included.  The  three  departments 
of  Algeria  are  also  treated  as  part  of  France  proper. 


324          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

commonwealths,  that  of  Prussia  will  be  considered  typical.  There 
the  mingling  of  historic  units  and  artificially  created  areas  makes 
local  organization  somewhat  confusing,  although  several  basic 
principles  may  be  observed. 

(a)  Matters   affecting   the   entire    country,   forming   a   part    of 
general   administration,   are   distinguished   from  those    of    purely 
local  concern.    To  the  former  class  belong  police,  religion,  schools, 
and  administrative  supervision  ;  to  the  latter,  roads,  charitable  in- 
stitutions, and  local  appropriations.    In  some  local  districts  separate 
organs  exist  for  the  administration  of  these  functions  ;  in  others 
the    same    organ    controls    both,    subject   to    central    supervision 
concerning  matters  of  general  interest. 

(b)  A  distinction  is  made  between  the  trained  officials  of  the 
administrative  or  judicial  service  and  the  nonprofessional  officials 
chosen  from  the  people  at  large.    The  former  receive  salaries,  are 
constantly  in  office,  and  form  part  of  the  governmental  bureaucracy. 
The  latter  are  unpaid,  although  their  service  is  usually  compulsory. 

The  areas  of  local  government  in  Prussia  are  provinces,  govern- 
ment districts  (Regierungsbezirke\  circles  (Kreise),  and  rural  and 
urban  communes.  In  the  provinces  there  are  separate  organs  for 
state  and  for  local  administration.  A  superior  president  (Ober 
prasident\  chosen  by  election,  represents  the  central  govern- 
ment. He  is  assisted  by  a  provincial  council,  whose  assent  is 
necessary  to  his  ordinances.  The  jurisdiction  of  these  officials 
extends  over  all  interests  affecting  the  republic  or  Prussia,  and  over 
the  general  affairs  of  the  entire  province.  In  most  cases  they  act 
through  the  officials  of  subordinate  districts.  The  local  interests 
of  the  province  are  directed  by  a  provincial  assembly  elected  by 
the  diets  of  the  circles,  and  by  a  provincial  committee  and  a  chief 
executive  (Landes director),  chosen  by  the  assembly. 

The  government  districts  have  no  organs  of  self-government. 
They  are  divisions  of  state  administration,  and  their  officials,  called 
collectively  the  administration  (Regierung),  are  professional  officials 
chosen  by  election.  They  act  usually  in  the  fprm  of  boards 
under  the  direction  of  the  national  ministers.  The  president  of 
the  administration  (Regierungsprasident)  is  the  most  important 
local  official  and  possesses  extensive  ordinance  and  veto  powers. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Some  supervisory  powers  are  exercised  by  the  people  of  the 
district  through  a  district  committee,  composed  in  the  main  of 
nonprofessional  members. 

In  the  circles  the  distinction  between  general  and  local  interests 
remains,  but  both  functions  are  performed  by  the  same  organiza- 
tion. Administration  is  in  the  hands  of  a  professional  officer 
(LandratJi)  appointed  by  the  superior  president  of  the  province, 
usually  on  nomination  of  the  diet  of  the  circle.  This  official  is 
assisted  by  a  circle  committee,  composed  of  six  additional  members 
chosen  by  the  circle  diet.  The  diet  represents  groups  of  interests 
within  the  circle,  representation  being  divided  between  town  and 
country,  and  in  the  latter  between  rural  communes  and  the  great 
landowners. 

The  government  of  the  rural  communes  is  carried  on  by  small 
representative  assemblies,  now  chosen  by  a  limited  popular  suf- 
frage ;  or,  in  the  smallest  communes,  by  direct  assemblies.  An 
executive  officer,  known  by  various  titles,  is  also  found.  There 
remain  in  Prussia,  as  a  survival  of  feudalism,  a  number  of  manors, 
which  form  separate  communes.  In  these  administration  was  until 
recently  in  the  hands  of  the  lord  of  the  manor.  With  the  fall  of 
the  imperial  system  democratic  local  control  was  set  up. 

3.  England.  England's  early  local  organization  was  fairly 
simple  and  uniform.  The  primary  divisions  were  shires  (coun- 
ties), subdivided  into  hundreds  (wapentakes  or  rapes),  and  these 
again  subdivided  into  townships  (vills).  Of  these  the  county 
became  the  most  important.  The  kings  exerted  their  growing 
powers  through  the  county  courts  and  the  sheriffs,  and  later 
through  the  justices  of  the  peace,  created  by  royal  authority.  As 
the  needs  of  local  government  increased,  the  powers  of  the  justices 
of  the  peace  expanded  until  the  entire  administrative  and  judicial 
government  of  the  county  was  placed  in  their  hands  ;  local  govern- 
ment thus  being  controlled  by  aristocratic  landowners  nominated 
by  the  central  government.  The  hundreds  diminished  in  impor- 
tance until  they  practically  disappeared  ;  and  the  townships,  almost 
absorbed  during  feudal  times  into  the  manor,  might  have  suffered 
a  similar  fate  had  not  the  church,  establishing  its  parishes  in  the 
main  on  township  lines,  given  them  a  new  vitality.  Within  the 


326         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

parish  a  general  assembly,  known  as  the  vestry,  offset  the  aristo- 
cratic organization  of  the  county.  In  addition  to  this  system  of 
rural  organization,  boroughs  developed,  whose  boundaries  often 
cut  across  those  of  the  other  local  areas.  Control  over  borough 
affairs  was  divided  among  their  own  officials,  acting  under  a 
charter  from  the  crown,  and  the  justices  of  the  peace  and  parish 
vestries  within  whose  jurisdiction  the  boroughs  lay. 

After  the  Reform  Act  of  1832  this  system  of  local  organiza- 
tion was  modified  by  a  series  of  statutes.  As  new  needs  in  local 
government  came  to  the  attention  of  Parliament  new  areas  and 
officials  were  created,  regardless  of  former  division,  until  the  con- 
fusion of  jurisdictions  and  boundaries  made  any  attempt  at  classi- 
fication impossible.  Unions  for  the  relief  of  the  poor,  highway 
and  burial  districts,  sanitary  districts,  school  districts,  and  numerous 
other  areas,  with  boundaries  overlapping,  with  diverse  forms  of 
organization,  and  with  each  independent  of  any  other  authority, 
were  established. 

Beginning  with  the  Public  Health  acts  of  1872  and  1875, 
which  divided  the  country  into  urban  and  rural  sanitary  districts, 
efforts  were  made  to  avoid  the  creation  of  additional  areas ;  and 
more  recent  Local  Government  acts  (1888,  1894)  have  simplified 
the  areas  and  extended  local  self-government  through  elected 
councils,  restricting  the  justices  of  the  peace,  in  the  main,  to  the 
exercise  of  judicial  functions.  The  present  local  divisions  are 
therefore  again  somewhat  uniform.  The  main  divisions  of  Eng- 
land and  Wales  are  sixty-two  administrative  counties,  each  of 
which  is  governed  by  a  council  composed  of  popularly  elected 
representatives,  together  with  a  prescribed  number  of  aldermen 
chosen  by  the  council  either  from  its  own  number  or  from  outside. 
The  councilmen  serve  for  three  years  and  the  aldermen  for  six, 
but  they  meet  and  act  as  a  single  body.  The  crown  is  represented 
in  each  county  by  a  lord  lieutenant,  who  nominates  the  justices  of 
the  peace,  to  be  appointed  by  the  lord  chancellor.  There  are 
also  a  sheriff,  undersheriff,  clerk  of  the  peace,'  coroners,  and  other 
officers.  Counties  are  divided  into  districts,  each  of  which  is 
governed  by  an  elected  representative  council ;  and  the  districts 
are  divided  into  parishes,  those  with  more  than  three  hundred 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  327 

inhabitants  having  elected  councils,  and  the  remainder  acting 
through  direct  assemblies.  Except  for  London,  whose  organiza- 
tion is  exceptional,  the  cities  are  county  boroughs  or  urban  dis- 
tricts, governed  like  the  rural  units  of  the  same  degree. 

Since  the  passage  of  the  Education  Act  of  1902,  which  abol- 
ished the  school  districts  and  placed  the  functions  of  the  school 
boards  in  the  hands  of  the  ordinary  councils,  the  only  important 
remaining  cross  divisions  are  the  Poor  Law  unions,  and  in  the 
rural  parts  of  the  country  even  their  functions  are  exercised  by 
members  of  the  local  district  council.  There  still  remain,  however, 
numerous  local  peculiarities,  and  the  size  and  population  of  districts 
of  the  same  order  show  wide  divergences. 

4.  The  United  States.  The  general  organization  of  local  gov- 
ernment in  the  United  States  shows  three  distinct  types,  determined 
originally  by  historic  conditions  of  colonial  settlement : 

(a)  The  town  system.  In  New  England,  where  each  settlement 
was  a  compact,  isolated  congregation,  held  together  by  purposes  of 
religion,  defense,  and  trade,  a  general  assembly,  or  "  town  meet- 
ing," chose  local  officers  and  made  rules  of  government.  This 
township,  or  "town,"  remains  the  vital  unit  of  local  government 
in  New  England  ;  and,  except  where  population  has  become  dense 
and  municipal  government  is  established,  town  meetings,  held 
annually,  elect  local  officials,  regulate  taxation  and  expenditures, 
and  decide  questions  of  local  policy.  The  officers  of  the  town  are 
selectmen,  three  to  nine  in  number,  who  act  as  the  executive  com- 
mittee of  the  town  meeting,  together  with  a  town  clerk,  treasurer, 
assessor,  tax  collector,  a  school  committee,  and  minor  officials. 

The  original  town  system  has  been  modified  somewhat  by  the 
grouping  of  towns  into  counties,  at  first  for  judicial  purposes, 
later  for  other  convenient  administrative  functions,  such  as  the 
equalization  of  taxes,  the  maintenance  of  roads,  county  buildings, 
etc. ;  and  by  the  growth  of  large  cities,  whose  complex  interests 
demand  a  more  highly  organized  form  of  administration.  The 
influx  of  foreigners  has  also  impaired  the  town  system  in  some 
places. 

Wherever  New  England  settlers  migrated  they  established  the 
town  system ;  and,  since  movement  of  population  in  the  United 


328          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

States  has  followed  climatic  lines,  the  town  reappears  in  the 
northern  tier  of  commonwealths.  In  the  new  comnlonwealths, 
however,  the  town  has  been  artificially  organized  and  the  town 
meeting  is  absent.  The  township  in  the  West  consists  of  a  regular 
tract  of  land  containing  thirty-six  square  miles,  and  was  established 
as  a  convenient  means  of  school  administration,  one  square  mile 
in  each  township  being  reserved  for  the  endowment  of  schools. 
The  county  in  the  West  usually  preceded  the  township  and  is 
more  closely  integrated  with  it  than  is  the  case  in  New  England. 

(b)  The  county  system.    The  southern  colonies  were  settled 
by  the  gradual  expansion  of  a  scattered  agricultural  population. 
Hence  counties,  sort  of  rude  imitations  of  English  shires,  were 
the  historic  units,  established  originally  for  judicial  purposes  and 
later  made    the    areas    for   most   local    administrative    functions. 
Although  the  original  counties  were  controlled  by  the  aristocratic 
planters,  county  officers  at  present  are  usually  elected  by  popular 
vote,  and  consist,  on  the  administrative  side,  of  a  board  of  com- 
missioners, which  has  under  it  a  treasurer,  an  auditor,  and  super- 
intendents of  education,  roads,  and  the  poor.    On  the  judicial  side 
the  county  has  a  sheriff,  clerk,  coroner,  attorney,  and  minor  officers. 

Where  local  taxation  for  schools  has  been  established  the 
southern  counties  have  been  subdivided  into  townships,  but  these 
are  as  yet  of  little  importance.  In  the  southwestern  common- 
wealths the  county  forms  a  natural  basis  of  government  for  the 
widespread  agricultural  population,  although  its  boundaries  are 
•more  artificial  and  it  shares  more  functions  with  its  townships 
than  is  the  case  in  the  South  Atlantic  commonwealths. 

(c)  The  mixed  system.    In  the  Middle  Atlantic  commonwealths 
and  in  the  greater  number  of  Western  commonwealths  a  combina- 
tion of  county  and  township  is  found.    Sometimes  the  one,  some- 
times the  other,  was  first  established  and  predominates.    In  general, 
functions  are  divided  between  them  according  to  the  nature  of  the 
function,  and  both  are  governed  by  elected  officials.    All  sections 
of  the  country,  especially  the  newer  commonwealths,  show  a  gen- 
eral tendency  to  combine  the  advantages  of  township  and  county 
and  to  approach  this  type  of  local  organization. 

In  addition  to  county  and  township  there  exist  in  the  United 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

States  school  districts,  sometimes  as  separate  areas  with  separate 
officials,  but  often  coincident  with  the  townships.  Urban  areas, 
such  as  villages,  boroughs,  and  cities,  have  separate  organizations. 

"  The  large  freedom  of  action  and  broad  scope  of  function  given 
to  local  authorities  is  the  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  Amer- 
ican system  of  government."  l  Acting  under  general  statutes,  local 
units  are  left  practically  free  to  administer  local  affairs,  and  their 
jurisdiction  covers  wide  and  varied  interests.  The  principle  of  sep- 
aration of  powers,  so  carefully  applied  to  the  national  and  com- 
monwealth governments  of  the  United  States,  is  not  extended  to 
the  local  areas.  Outside  of  the  incorporated  urban  units  there  is 
a  general  absence  of  representative  lawmaking  bodies,  and  even 
where  such  bodies  exist  their  powers  are  narrow,  limited  by  elab- 
orate constitutional  or  statute  restrictions.  On  the  other  hand, 
local  officials  and  boards  exercise  extensive  executive  powers,  sub- 
ject to  little  restriction  on  the  part  of  any  superior  authority .  In 
administration  local  government  is  the  most  vital  part  of  our  sys- 
tem, and  its  importance,  relative  to  that  of  the  commonwealths, 
is  constantly  increasing. 

126.  Historical  development  of  cities.  Concentration  of  popu- 
lation is  a  primary  requisite  to  advancing  civilization.  A  highly 
developed  economic  life,  with  that  division  of  labor  that  makes 
possible  effective  production,  and  that  leisure  that  gives  opportu- 
nity for  intellectual  progress,  is  possible  only  where  population  is 
numerous  and  closely  aggregated.  Contact  of  man  with  man  stim- 
ulates mental  advance  and  establishes  social  customs  and  standards. 
Permanent  abodes  and  constant  social  intercourse  strengthen  the 
idea  of  territorial  attachment  that  underlies  patriotism.  And  the 
need  for  order  and  regulation,  caused  by  complex  personal  rela- 
tions and  accumulating  property,  necessitates  better  organization 
and  more  extensive  authority.  Ideals  and  institutions  developed 
under  the  conditions  of  active  city  life  gradually  spread,  through 
imitation  or  compulsion,  until  their  influence  reaches  all  places  and 
all  classes.  Modern  political  ideas,  existing  standards  of  civiliza- 
tion, and  the  present  advanced  system  of  economic  life  grew  out 
of  conditions  requiring  compact  urban  units. 

i  Wilson,  The  State,  p.  506 


330         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Each  civilization  as  it  arises  centers  in  its  cities,  and  their  gov- 
ernmental organization  and  activities,  both  as  distinct  units  of  civic 
life  and  as  component  parts  of  larger  political  areas,  cover  an 
important  field  in  political  science.  In  Egypt,  Memphis  and  Thebes 
were  the  centers  of  political  life.  Oriental  history  is  the  story  of' 
the  great  palace  cities  of  Assyria,  Babylonia,  and  Persia.  With  the 
development  of  trade  routes  Damascus  began  its  important  career ; 
and  later  the  Phoenician  ports,  Tyre  and  Sidon,  came  into  promi- 
nence, extending  their  commerce  and  establishing  trading  colonies 
along  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean. 

Among  the  Greeks  the  city  represented  the  perfection  of  polit- 
ical life.  Athens,  Sparta,  Corinth,  and  many  others  were  inde- 
pendent communities  with  large  spheres  of  public  activity,  making 
no  distinction  between  functions  that  are  now  considered  national 
and  those  more  specifically  municipal.  Even  the  Greek  colonies  in 
Asia  Minor,  Sicily,  and  southern  Italy  were  not  dependent  trading 
posts,  but  vigorous,  self-governing  political  units.  Under  Alexander 
many  new  cities  were  founded,  of  which  Alexandria  and  Antioch 
were  the  most  important ;  and  as  the  independence  of  the  cities 
was  subordinated  to  the  more  comprehensive  organization  of  the 
empire,  local  government  and  municipal  activities  were  given  oppor- 
tunity to  expand. 

The  Roman  Empire  was  formed  by  the  foundation  and  conquest 
of  many  cities.  Rome,  starting  as  a  city  state,  extended  her  sway 
by  alliance  and  conquest  over  surrounding  cities,  and  these  were 
gradually  placed  on  a  common  basis  as  municipal  towns,  with 
Roman  citizenship  extended  to  all  their  inhabitants.  The  legal 
position  of  the  Roman  municipality  closely  resembled  that  of  a 
modern  city.  It  was  created  by  and  subordinated  to  the  state,  it 
retained  the  administration  of  law  and  government  in  local  affairs ; 
and  it  had  the  legal  and  property  rights  of  a  person.  In  the  Roman 
world  city  life  predominated.  Ancient  Italy  is  said  to  have  had 
twelve  hundred  cities,  and  the  population  of  Rome  at  its  height  has 
been  estimated  at  from  one  to  two  millions,  —  a  figure  not  again 
reached  until  the  eighteenth  century.  In  these  cities  modern  prob- 
lems of  government  and  administration  existed,  and  numerous 
activities  for  public  safety  and  general  welfare  were  maintained. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  331 

The  fall  of  the  Roman  Empire  almost  ruined  the  cities  of  west- 
ern Europe.  Decline  in  commerce  and  manufactures  destroyed 
their  economic  basis ;  a  diminished  population,  whose  freedom  of 
movement  was  restricted  because  of  the  absence  of  a  strong  central 
governing  authority,  clustered  in  small,  self-supporting  rural  com- 
munities ;  and  new  villages  grew  up  but  slowly  around  feudal  castles 
or  specially  protected  market  places.  In  the  East  and  in  the 
Mohammedan  world  city  life  survived  and  flourished,  but  the 
remaining  western  cities,  whose  administration  had  generally  fallen 
under  ecclesiastical  control,  retained  but  few  traces  of  their  former 
vigorous  and  extensive  municipal  life. 

Reviving  commerce,  hastened  by  the  contact  of  East  and  West 
in  the  crusades,  gave,  especially  in  Italy,  a  new  impetus  to  city 
life  about  the  twelfth  century.  Pisa,  Genoa,  and  Venice,  several 
seaports  in  France  and  Spain,  and  the  free  cities  of  Germany  took 
the  lead  in  this  revival  of  urban  communities.  In  the  absence  of 
strong  central  authorities  many  of  these  cities  secured  positions 
independent  of  the  prevailing  feudal  system,  and  with  their  mer- 
chants and  artisans  organized  into  guilds,  maintained  themselves 
as  self-governing  units.  Their  interests  were,  however,  primarily 
economic  rather  than  political ;  their  chief  activities  were  regulations 
concerning  trade  and  industry ;  and  their  main  contests  aimed  to 
secure  economic  privileges  or  to  crush  commercial  rivals.  Political 
and  civil  rights  and  national  spirit  were  as  yet  undeveloped. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages,  as  national  states  arose, 
cities  in  most  parts  of  Europe  were  subordinated  to  larger  political 
units.  Economic  affairs  were  controlled  by  the  central  authority, 
and  local  governing  powers  were  granted,  usually  in  the  form  of  a 
charter  from  the  king,  to  a  small  group  within  the  city.  The  break- 
ing down  of  the  guild  system,  the  growth  of  "  domestic  "  manu- 
factures in  the  rural  districts,  and  the  constant  wars  throughout 
Europe  destroyed  the  importance  of  many  cities.  At  the  same 
time  the  closing  of  the  old  trade  routes  to  the  East,  and  the  dis- 
covery of  America  and  the  new  sea  passage  to  the  Indies,  led  to  a 
general  recasting  of  trade  routes  and  of  urban  centers.  Seville  and 
Cadiz  in  Spain,  Lisbon  in  Portugal,  and  later  the  cities  of  the 
Netherlands  came  into  prominence.  City  life  in  Germany  revived, 


332          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

and  even  in  England  fair-sized  towns  were  found.  London  and 
Paris,  the  seats  of  national  government,  gained  with  the  central- 
ization of  royal  power,  and  were  by  far  the  most  important  cities 
in  their  respective  states,  and  the  most  populous  capitals  in 
Europe. 

The  present  concentration  of  population  into  cities  is  largely  the 
work  of  the  past  century,  especially  of  its  latter  half.  In  1800  only 
21  per  cent  of  the  population  of  England  and  Wales  lived  in 
cities  of  over  10,000 ;  at  present  more  than  half  the  population  of 
the  entire  British  Isles  lives  in  cities  twice  as  large.  In  Prussia  the 
proportion  of  population  living  in  cities  of  over  100,000  increased 
during  the  years  1816-1900  from  1.8  per  cent  to  12.9  per  cent. 
In  1 80 1  only  2.8  per  cent  of  the  population  of  France  lived  in  cities 
of  1 00,000  or  over ;  in  1 900  the  proportion  had  increased  to  1 3 
per  cent.  In  the  former  year  9.5  per  cent,  in  the  latter  year  27 
per  cent,  lived  in  cities  of  10,000  or  over.  In  1800  there  was  no 
city  in  the  United  States  with  a  population  of  100,000.  At  pres- 
ent 20  per  cent  of  our  population  lives  in  cities  of  that  size  or  over, 
and  almost  one  third  of  our  population  lives  in  cities  having  a 
population  of  at  least  10,000.*  While  these  modern  cities  are 
in  all  cases  subordinated  to  the  authority  of  the  state,  questions  of 
municipal  government  and  municipal  functions  have  again  become 
important  in  the  political  life  of  the  times. 

Among  the  causes  of  the  recent  rapid  increase  in  urban 
population  are  : 

1.  Improved  sanitary  conditions,  by  which  cities  formerly  de- 
pendent upon  immigration  from  rural  districts  to  maintain  their 
population,  have  now  also  a  large  excess  of  births  over  deaths. 

2.  The  development  of  transportation,  by  which  markets  have 
been  widened,  wants  increased,  and  the  maintenance  of  a  large 
population  at  a  distance  from  food  supplies  made  possible. 

3.  The  use  of  machinery  and  artificial  power,  by  which  division 
of  labor  has  been  carried  to  a  high  degree  of  perfection  and  pro- 
duction organized  on  a  large  scale. 

4.  The  development  of  secondary  pursuits,  such  as  banking, 
insurance,  brokerage,  retailing,  etc.,  dependent  upon  the  extension 

i  Fairlie,  Municipal  Administration,  pp.  121-122. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 


333 


of  industry  and  trade;  and  of  personal  or  professional  services, 
amusements,  etc.,  dependent  upon  the  patronage  of  a  large 
population. 

5 .  The  extension  of  governing  authority  and  activities,  by  which 
political  centers,  even  in  the  absence  of  manufactures  and  trade, 
may  become  important  cities. 

127.  Municipal  government.  The  city  has  occupied  three  fairly 
distinct  positions  in  political  society : 1 

1 .  As  city  state.    At  first  the  city  was  an  independent  unit,  or 
city  state,  whose  inhabitants  were  united  by  ties  of  kinship  and 
religion,  and  whose  functions  included  the  regulation  of  interests 
now  considered  national  as  well  as  those  of  local  concern.    Such 
were  the  cities  of  Greece  and  Rome ;  and  about  the  tenth  century 
similar  independent  municipalities  arose  in  Italy,  Germany,  and 
France.    These  medieval  cities,  however,  were  not  based  on  com- 
mon kinship  and  religion,  but  resulted  from  reviving  trade  and 
commerce.    Hence  self-government  was  desired  so  that  business 
could  be  transacted  without  the  burdensome  restrictions  of  feudal 
custom  and  law ;  and  aid  was  often  secured  from  the  kings,  who 
desired  to  weaken  the  feudal  nobility.    With  a  few  exceptions, 
however,  complete  independence  of  the  overlordship  of  emperor 
or  king  was  seldom  claimed. 

2.  As  administrative  district.    Just  as  the  growing  centraliza- 
tion of  the  Roman  Empire  reduced  its  independent  cities  to  sub- 
ordinate positions  in  the  state,  so  the  rise  of  national  monarchies 
toward  the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages  subjected  the  medieval  cities 
to  national  control.    The  widening  of  social  and  economic  interests 
made  many  matters,  originally  of  local  concern,  national  in  scope ; 
and  local  control  was  replaced  by  regulation  at  the  hands  of  the 
growing  national  organization.    In  addition,  city  populations  pre- 
ferred the  uniformity  and  justice  of  national  regulation  to  the 
selfish  administration  of  the  corrupt  oligarchies  into  whose  hands 
city  government  had  fallen.   Accordingly  the  city  appeared  in  gov- 
ernment as  an  administrative  district,  subordinated  to  the  central 
authority  of  the  state,  and  differing  in  few  essential  ways  from  the 
other  administrative  districts  into  which  the  state  was  divided. 

i  Goodnow,  Municipal  Government,  chaps,  iv-vii. 


334          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

3.  As  local  government.  The  Industrial  Revolution  and  the 
improvements  in  transportation  that  characterized  the  latter  part  of 
the  eighteenth  and  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  con- 
centrated population  in  large  cities,  compelled  these  cities  to  widen 
the  scope  of  their  functions,  and  created  many  new  municipal 
problems.  Accordingly  the  city,  while  remaining  subordinate  to 
the  state,  and  acting  as  its  agent  in  most  affairs  of  general  admin- 
istration, has  also  been  recognized  as  a  unit  for  the  satisfaction 
of  local  needs,  and  has  been  given  the  organization  and  powers 
necessary  for  this  new  position.  Modern  cities  are  usually  munici- 
pal corporations,  created  under  charters  issued  by  the  state,  which 
determines,  either  by  its  constitutional  law  or  by  legislative  statute, 
the  scope  of  municipal  authority  and  the  degree  of  national  super- 
vision and  control. 

In  determining  the  relations  between  city  and  state  two  general 
systems  are  in  use.  In  England  and  the  United  States  the  powers 
that  city  governments  may  exercise  are  enumerated  in  detail  and 
strictly  construed.  Accordingly  the  presumption  is  against  the 
exercise  by  the  city  of  any  power  unless  specifically  granted,  and 
frequent  application  must  be  made  to  the  legislature  for  additional 
powers  desired.  This  system  has  led  to  the  granting  of  many 
special  charters,  to  frequent  legislative  interference,  and  to  control 
through  legislation  rather  than  through  administration.  The  pres- 
ent tendency  in  these  states  is  to  incorporate  cities  under  general, 
uniform  acts,  and  to  widen  the  scope  of  their  local  authority.  On 
the  continent  cities  are  granted  wide  general  powers,  the  presump- 
tion being  that  municipal  authorities  may  exercise  all  powers  not 
specifically  forbidden.  In  addition,  cities  are  incorporated  under 
general  acts  applying  to  all  cities  and  laying  down  general  prin- 
ciples of  organization  and  function.  The  control  of  the  central 
government  is  accordingly  exercised  through  administration  rather 
than  through  legislation. 

The  internal  organization  of  municipal  government  may  be 
viewed  under  the  following  heads : 1 

I .  The  share  of  the  people  in  city  government.  This  depends 
upon  the  extent  of  municipal  suffrage,  the  number  of  elected 

1  Goodnow,  Municipal  Government,  chaps,  ix-xi. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  335 

officials,  and  the  degree  of  authority  exercised  by  the  people 
through  direct  legislation  or  through  control  of  officials  previ- 
ously selected. 

(a)  Municipal  suffrage.    States  such  as  the  United  States,  France, 
and  Italy,  that  have  adopted  the  general  principle  of  manhood 
suffrage,  apply  this  principle  to  city  elections  also,  although  edu- 
cational qualifications  in  Italy  exclude  many  from  voting.    France 
and  Italy  permit  persons  who  pay  direct  taxes  in  a  city,  but  reside 
elsewhere,  to  vote  in  the  city  instead  of  at  their  places  of  residence. 
England  and  Germany,  where  property  was  formerly  important  in 
determining  suffrage  rights,  either  demand  a  property  qualification 
for  voting  or  give  greater  voting  power  to  the  larger  property  hold- 
ers.   All  states  require  a  certain  period  of  residence,  or,  in  case  the 
vote  goes  with  property,  the  payment  of  taxes  for  a  certain  period 
before  voting.    The  length  of  residence  demanded  is  shortest  in 
the  United  States.    In  general  the  proportion  of  voters  is  greatest 
in  American  cities,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  their  heterogeneous 
population,  many  of  whom  have  no  permanent  interest  in  the  city 
and  are  unable  to  vote  intelligently,  makes  universal  suffrage  a 
questionable  policy. 

(b)  Elective  officers.    In  this  respect  the  United  States  differs 
from  most  other  countries.    In  European  cities  members  of  the 
council  only  are  elected,  all  other  officials  being  appointed.    Even 
in  England  only  a  few  minor  officials,  in  addition  to  the  councils, 
are  chosen  by  popular  vote.    In  cities  of  the  United  States,  how- 
ever, long  lists  of  officials  are  chosen  by  election.    This  principle 
was  introduced  about  the  middle  of  the  last  century  as  a  reaction 
against  the  evils  of  the  spoils  system,  although  in  practice  it  made 
no  improvement.    The  difficulty  of  knowing  the  merits  of  candi- 
dates in  large  cities  and  the  uncertainty  of  securing  the  expert 
knowledge  needed  in  the  complex  administration  of  city  govern- 
ment are  objections  to  popular  election.    Besides,  party  control 
through    numerous    elected  officers  is  no  less   than   under   the 
appointive  system.    As  a  result,  a  strong  reaction  toward  central- 
ization and  appointment  is  manifest  in  American  cities.    In  addi- 
tion, efforts  are  being  made  to  weaken  party  control  by  regulating 
nominations  to  city  offices.    Among  the  proposed  methods  are 


336          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

"  nomination  by  petition  "  and  "  direct  nomination."  Legal  regu- 
lation of  political  parties,  or,  if  possible,  the  formation  of  inde- 
pendent parties  on  municipal  issues  also  tends  to  diminish  present 
evils  in  American  cities. 

(c)  Direct  popular  government.  Municipal  voters  may  some- 
times act  directly  through  the  initiative  and  referendum,  or  may 
exercise  a  control  over  elected  officers  by  means  of  the  recall.1  In 
most  states,  where  city  councils  are  fairly  satisfactory  governing 
bodies,  little  use  of  these  devices  in  municipal  government  is  made, 
although  Italy  requires  the  referendum  in  a  few  specified  cases. 
In  the  cities  of  the  United  States  many  questions  are  referred  to! 
popular  vote,  partly  because  of  the  democratic  idea  that  affairs  of 
local  concern  should  be  decided  by  popular  vote,  and  partly  because 
of  the  failure  of  city  councils  to  govern  satisfactorily. 

2.  The  city  council.  In  all  important  states  city  councils  are 
elective.  In  France,  Italy,  England,  and  Germany  council  mem- 
bers are  usually  elected  on  a  general  ticket,  although  provision  is 
made  for  minority  representation.  In  the  United  States  the  dis- 
trict system  prevails.  In  France,  and  generally  in  the  United 
States,  all  council  members  are  elected  at  the  same  time ;  in 
England,  Germany,  and  Italy  partial  renewal  is  the  rule.  The 
term  varies  from  an  average  of  two  years  in  the  United  States  to 
six  years  in  Germany.  In  size  no  uniformity  exists,  council  mem- 
bership ranging  all  the  way  from  less  than  a  score  to  several 
hundreds.  In  general,  the  type  of  men  chosen  for  city  councils 
is  superior  in  England  and  Germany  to  that  in  France  and  the 
United  States. 

From  the  standpoint  of  relative  importance  councils  differ 
widely,  being  strongest  in  England  and  weakest  in  the  United 
States  : 

(a)  In  England  the  council  is  the  -organic  authority  of  the 
municipal  system.  It  determines  the  government  of  the  boroughs, 
appoints  and  directs  all  officials,  and  exercises  all  powers  permitted 
by  the  central  government.  While  much  of  its  work  is  divided 
among  committees,  the  council  is  the  final  authority,  and  all  admin- 
istrative officers  are  merely  agents  to  carry  out  its  policy  in  detail. 

1  See  section  92. 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  337 

(b)  On  the  continent  provision  is  made  for  an  executive  with 
certain  powers  independent  of  the  council.    The  executive  officials 
are,  however,  chosen  by  the  council  and  many  council  members 
serve  on  administrative  boards.    Council  and  executive  each  share 
in  the  functions  of  the  other,  legislative  and  administrative  powers 
being  closely  coordinated. 

(c)  In  the  United  States  the  council  does  not  choose  the  mayor 
or  heads  of  departments.    Besides,  the  detailed  municipal  legisla- 
tion enacted  by  commonwealth  legislatures  and  the  limits  placed 
upon  the  financial   powers  of  city  councils  further  diminish  the 
scope  of  their  activity.    As  a  result  the  council  is  excluded  from 
executive  and  much  limited  even  in  its  legislative  activity. 

Previous  to  1830  the  council  was  supreme  in  the  United  States 
as  in  England,  but  dissatisfaction  with  conditions  of  city  govern- 
ment led  to  a  weakening  of  the  council,  to  a  distribution  of  admin- 
istrative powers  among  many  boards  and  officials,  variously  chosen, 
and  to  greater  interference  on  the  part  of  commonwealth  legisla- 
tures. The  resultant  loss  of  self-government  has  led  to  recent 
tendencies  toward  strengthening  the  council,  centralizing  the 
administration,  and  increasing  local  autonomy. 

3.  The  city  executive.  As  already  indicated,  all  states  except 
England  recognize  in  city  affairs  a  certain  separation  between 
legislation  and  administration,  and  intrust  the  latter  to  more  or  less 
independent  organs,  the  United  States  carrying  this  separation 
furthest.  In  fact,  except  in  England,  the  executive  is  the  domi- 
nating factor  in  municipal  organization.  The  executive  authority 
is  usually  vested  in  a  single  head,  or  mayor,  but  sometimes,  for 
instance  in  Germany,  in  an  executive  board.  In  Germany  and  the 
United  States  the  executive  is  especially  strong,  having  a  veto  over 
all  acts  of  the  council  and  a  practically  independent  tenure.  In 
England,  France,  and  Italy  the  executive  is  weakened  by  the  fact 
that  only  council  members  are  eligible  for  election  as  mayor,  and 
by  the  absence  of  a  veto  power.  Even  in  these  states,  however, 
the  councils  are  largely  guided  by  the  mayors  they  have  chosen. 

The  relation  of  the  mayor  to  subordinate  officials  differs.  In 
England  the  council  appoints,  removes,  and  directs  municipal 
officials.  In  Germany  this  function  is  exercised  by  the  executive. 


338          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

In  France  and  Italy  the  council  elects  the  heads  of  departments 
and  the  mayor  assigns  to  them  their  duties  and  directs  their  actions. 
In  the  United  States  the  mayor  must  often  secure  the  consent 
of  the  council  to  his  appointments,  and  in  some  cities  heads  of 
departments  are  elected  by  the  people.  In  the  subordinate  civil 
service  Germany  emphasizes  administrative  efficiency  through 
permanent  tenure,  while  the  United  States  aims  at  popular  control 
through  short  terms  and  frequent  changes.  In  general,  the  cities 
of  England  and  the  continent,  whose  city  government  is  largely  in 
the  hands  of  a  permanent,  professional  class,  secure  more  efficient, 
honest,  and  public-spirited  administration  than  is  the  case  in  the 
United  States,  where  most  city  offices  are  filled  as  rewards  for 
political  services. 

128.  Municipal  reform  in  the  United  States.  Problems' of  city 
government  are  especially  pressing  in  the  United  States.  Municipal 
growth  began  at  the  time  when  public  interest  centered  around 
national  questions,  such  as  the  share  of  the  people  in  government, 
the  relation  of  the  commonwealths  to  the  Union,  and  the  extension 
or  abolition  of  slavery.  Accordingly  little  attention  was  given  to 
the  new  phenomena  of  city  life  until  after  these  pressing  national 
questions  had  been  settled,  and  by  that  time  the  early  municipal 
organization  was  badly  outgrown.  Besides,  political  parties,  created 
by  these  questions  and  by  the  necessity  of  harmonizing  the  exten- 
sive separation  and  division  of  powers  in  our  constitutional  system, 
built  up  their  organization  by  means  of  the  spoils  system,  in  which 
the  numerous  city  offices  became  rewards  for  partisan  service. 
Consequently  local  issues  were  subordinated  to  the  needs  of 
national  political  organization,  and  municipal  life  again  suffered. 
Still  later  the  growth  of  corporate  interests,  coupled  with  the  fact 
that  the  major  part  of  city  government  has  to  do  with  business 
administration  and  with  the  expenditure  of  money,  led  to  the 
close  connection  between  business  and  politics  that  underlies  the 
"  graft  "  evil.  These  conditions  are  not  improved  by  the  extremely 
cosmopolitan  character  of  city  populations  in  the  United  States. 

Since  1870  considerable  attention  has  been  given  to  municipal 
reform,  and  various  plans  of  organization  have  been  suggested 
and  given  practical  application.  There  is  also  a  growing  realization 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  339 

of  the  value  of  a  permanent  and  expert  civil  service,  and  a  more 
intelligent  public  opinion  on  issues  of  municipal  concern.  The 
municipal  program,  drawn  up  by  a  committee  of  the  National 
Municipal  League,  urges  local  charter  legislation  and  grants  of 
general  powers  to  cities,  so  that  the  constant  interference  of  com- 
monwealth legislatures  may  be  abolished.  It  also  urges  the 
separation  of  local  and  national  politics,  improvements  in  electoral 
methods,  and  restrictions  on  political  patronage.  Administrative 
responsibility  is  centered  in  a  popularly  elected  mayor  who  has 
extensive  powers  of  appointment  and  removal ;  while,  subject 
to  the  mayor's  veto,  an  elected  council,  of  a  single  Chamber, 
exercises  all  legislative  powers  conferred  upon  the  city. 

Considerable  difference  of  opinion  exists  as  to  the  proper  posi- 
tion of  council  and  mayor  in  American  cities.  Some  authorities 
would  increase  the  powers  of  the  council  on  the  ground  that  the 
distinction  between  local  legislation  and  local  administration  is 
fundamental,  that  increased  powers  and  responsibility  would  im- 
prove the  caliber  of  men  chosen  to  city  councils,  and  that  an 
elected  council,  having  broad  knowledge  and  representing  differ- 
ent interests,  most  accurately  represents  the  people.  Others  prefer 
the  greater  concentration  of  responsibility  and  the  more  effective 
administration  secured  by  centralizing  authority  under  the  mayor. 

A  more  recent  development  in  municipal  government  is  the 
commission  plan,  by  which  entire  control  is  vested  in  a  small 
board,  chosen  at  large  by  popular  election.  In  the  Newport  plan 
the  commission,  which  controls  administration  and  appointments, 
is  combined  with  a  large  council,  which  controls  ordinances  and 
appropriations.  The  Galveston  plan  vests  administrative,  appoint- 
ing, finance,  and  ordinance  powers  in  a  commission  of  five  men, 
elected  at  large  and  acting  in  a  body.  The  Des  Moines  plan  adds 
the  initiative,  referendum,  and  recall. 

Commission  government  has  the  advantages  of  concentrating 
authority  and  responsibility,  thus  securing  a  businesslike  adminis- 
tration, of  giving  the  voters  something  definite  to  vote  for,  of 
securing  a  better  type  of  man  than  under  numerous  decentralized 
authorities,  and  of  avoiding  the  deadlocks  formerly  frequent.  At 
the  same  time  there  is  danger  of  extravagance,  since  powers  of 


340         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

raising  and  spending  money  are  given  to  the  same  persons ;  and 
partisan  spirit  may  be  increased,  since  the  conflict  centers  on  the 
election  of  a  few  all-powerful  officials.  Besides,  there  is  no  guaran- 
tee that  experts  in  municipal  affairs  will  be  elected ;  and,  since  the 
commission  deals  mainly  with  administration,  and  since  there  is 
in  the  United  States  a  deep-rooted  dislike  of  intrusting  lawmaking 
powers  to  a  small  body  of  men,  the  danger  of  legislative 
interference  is  increased. 

129.  Municipal  activities.  The  functions  discharged  by  city 
governments  differ  materially  from  those  performed  by  other 
political  divisions.  In  contrast  to  the  broad  questions  of  foreign 
affairs  or  of  general  internal  policy  with  which  national  govern- 
ments deal,  or  to  the  regulation  of  the  ordinary  relations  of  persons 
and  property  with  which  rural  local  areas  are  concerned,  city  prob- 
lems are,  in  the  main,  matters  of  business  administration  or  of 
complex  social  adjustment.  The  character  of  city  populations,  and 
the  physical,  intellectual,  and  moral  conditions  of  the  artificial 
environment  in  which  they  live,  necessitate  unique  forms  of 
governmental  organization  and  the  performance  of  special  services. 

As  already  seen,  cities  occupy  a  double  position.  They  serve  as 
agents  of  the  state  government  and  as  organizations  for  the  satis- 
faction of  local  needs.  In  the  latter  capacity  their  functions  are 
limited  to  internal  affairs,  and  even  in  this  field  their  control  over 
judicial  and  financial  matters  is  limited.  Besides,  the  final  deter- 
mination of  proper  functions  for  state  and  for -city  lies  in  the 
hands  of  the  state,  which  may  at  any  time  extend  or  limit  the 
functions  that  the  city,  either  as  a  local  unit  or  as  an  agent  fof 
the  central  government,  may  perform.  In  general,  England  and 
the  United  States  emphasize  the  point  of  view  of  the  state,  limit- 
ing the  city  to  such  functions  only  as  are  definitely  granted  and 
enumerated  in  detail  by  the  state.  On  the  continent  the  presump- 
tion favors  the  city,  which  has  power  to  do  anything  not  definitely 
forbidden  to  it  or  not  intrusted  to  some  other  governmental  au- 
thority. The  former  independent  city  life  and  the  long  absence  of 
centralized  government  on  the  continent  account  for  this  attitude. 

Moreover,  the  peculiar  geographical  or  social  conditions  of  each 
city  offer  special  problems  and  make  a  comprehensive  statement 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  municipal  activities  impossible.  Local  conditions  determine 
whether  certain  duties  shall  be  undertaken  by  the  city  or  by 
the  state,  and  whether  certain  functions  may  be  best  performed 
by  private  initiative  or  by  public  control ;  and  changing  conditions 
may  widen  or  narrow  the  scope  of  municipal  activity,  as  compared 
with  both  state  authority  and  private  enterprise.  At  the  same 
time  a  general  classification  of  municipal  activities  may  be  made, 
grouped  roughly  under  the  following  heads  : 

1 .  Public  health  and  safety.    The  concentration  of  population 
in  large  cities  and  the  circumstances  of  city  life  necessitate  exten- 
sive precautions  for  the  maintenance  of  public  peace  and  order 
and  for  the  safeguarding  of  life  and  health.    An  organized  and 
disciplined  police  force  for  the  preservation  of  order  and  for  the 
prevention  and  detection  of  crime,  and  special  judicial  machinery 
for  dealing  summarily  with  minor  cases,  form  an  irrmortant  part  of 
this  side  of  municipal  administration.    Another  extensive  organi- 
zation serves  as  a  protection  against  fire,  and  precautions  against 
disease  are  taken  by  inspection  of  food  and  water,  prevention  of 
unsanitary  conditions,  and  quarantine  of  infectious  diseases.    The 
remarkable    recent   advance  of   medical  and  sanitary  science  is 
shown  by  the  vital  statistics  now  recorded  in  many  cities.    Building 
regulations  aim  at  protection  against  fire,  stability  of  construction, 
sanitary  conditions,  and  aesthetic  effects. 

2.  Charities  and  correction.    In  caring  for  the  poor  and  the 
defective  private  enterprise  supplements  municipal  effort,  and  in 
the  administration  of  prisons  the  central  authorities  have  taken 
over  a  large  share  of  control.    However,  an  important  phase  of 
municipal  activity  deals  with  public  charity  and  with  the  mainte- 
nance of  hospitals,  asylums,  and  correctional  institutions.    In  ad- 
dition, European  cities  in  particular  have  developed  employment 
bureaus,  public  loan  offices,  and  savings  banks. 

3.  Education.    Public  education,  especially  of  elementary  and 
secondary  grade,  is  largely  controlled  by  the  municipality,  although 
here  again  private  initiative  enters  and  a  tendency  toward  control 
by  the  central  authorities  is  manifest.    Cities  also  maintain  public 
libraries,  museums    of   art   and    science,  and,  on  the  continent, 
municipal  theaters  and  opera  houses. 


342          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

4.  Municipal  improvements.  This  side  of  municipal  activity 
deals  with  works  of  municipal  engineering  and  is  most  important 
in  large  cities.  Such  functions,  most  of  which  are  concerned  with 
city  property  open  for  public  use,  may  be  divided  into  two  groups  : 

(a)  Those    supported    mainly  by  public   taxation.    Under   this 
head  belong  public  baths,  parks,  and  playgrounds,  the  construction 
and  maintenance  of  streets,  bridges,  and  sewer  systems,  and  the 
removal  and  disposal  of  waste  materials.    An  important  aspect  of 
this  group  is  city  planning,  either  for  the  purpose  of  providing  for 
future  growth  or  to  remedy  undesirable  conditions  in  congested  areas. 

(b)  Those  maintained  by  charges  for  services  rendered.    Under 
this  head  come  the  supply  of  water,  gas,  and  electric  light ;  markets, 
docks,  and  harbors ;  and  local  transportation.    In  these  activities, 
all  of  which  are  natural  monopolies,  private  companies  as  well  as 
municipalities  are  engaged,  and  the  individuals  directly  benefited 
bear  the  major  part  of  the  expense.    At  the  same  time  the  func- 
tions performed  are  of  a  public  nature  and  the  material  equipment 
required  makes  use  of  the  public  streets.    Accordingly  the  question 
arises  whether  cheap  and  efficient  service  is  best  secured  through 
private  concerns,  operating  under  a  franchise  granted  by  public 
authority,  or  through  municipal  ownership  and  operation.    In  case 
of  the  former  the  proper  terms  of  the  franchise  and  the  extent  of 
government  regulation  still  demand  solution.    Originally  most  of 
these  matters  were  in  private  hands,  but  the  improvement  of  gov- 
ernmental organization  during  the  last  century,  together  with  the 
demand  for  excessive  profits  and  the  disregard  of  public  health 
and  convenience  manifested  under  private  management,  has  ex- 
tended the  field  of  municipal  operation.    In  Europe,  where  fairly 
satisfactory  systems  of  city  government  have  been  worked  out, 
municipal  ownership  is  most  extensive.    Even  in  the  United  States 
this  sphere  of  city  activity  is  expanding. 

The  proper  adjustment  between  municipal  government  and 
these  public  utilities  is  one  of  the  most  important  problems  of 
the  day.  Because  of  the  inherently  monopolistic  character  of  such 
industries,  the  dependence  of  the  public  upon  the  services  which 
they  perform,  and  the  fact  that  with  them  competition  is  destruc- 
tive rather  than  regulative  and  results  in  unjust  discriminations, 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 


343 


necessitates  a  relation  to  public  authority  essentially  different  from 
that  which  governs  ordinary  business  interests.1  Besides,  these 
industries  cannot  be  carried  on  without  the  grant  of  some  public 
privilege,  and  in  the  United  States,  where  constitutional  provisions 
place  limitations  on  the  revoking  of  charters  and  contracts,  the 
situation  is  more  complex  than  in  Europe,  where  a  franchise  may 
be  revoked  at  the  will  of  the  authority  that  grants  it. 

In  addition  to  the  existing  difference  of  opinion  as  to  whether 
general  welfare  is  best  secured  by  public  or  by  private  ownership 
of  such  industries  as  street  railways,  gas  and  electric  light,  and 
water  services,  the  fundamental  question  as  to  what  form  the 
return  to  the  public  for  privileges  granted  should  take  is  still 
unsettled.  Shall  the  community  exact  a  money  return  in  the  form 
of  taxes  or  division  of  profits,  or  shall  it  demand  improvement  in 
service  and  lower  cost  to  the  users  ?  And  this  question  is  further 
complicated  by  the  necessity  not  only  of  securing  some  return  but 
of  maintaining  control  over  the  service. 

In  states,  such  as  the  United  States,  where  most  public  utilities 
still  remain  in  private  hands,  the  terms  of  the  franchise  are  of 
prime  importance.  Franchises  should  be  granted  for  a  term  of 
years  sufficiently  long  to  induce  capitalists  to  invest  in  the  enter- 
prise, yet  not  so  long  that  municipal  control  over  the  corporation 
is  destroyed.  Similarly,  the  terms  of  the  franchise  must  combine 
fair  treatment  of  private  business  enterprise,  with  proper  provision 
for  present  and  future  public  welfare. 

In  general,  a  good  franchise  will  retain  not  only  a  properly  safe- 
guarded control  over  the  charges  of  public-service  corporations, 
but  over  their  capitalization  and  dividends  as  well.  Public  super- 
vision of  accounting  will  also  be  provided  for.  The  term  of  the 
franchise  will  depend  upon  the  size  of  the  city  and  the  probable 
net  returns,— from  twenty-five  to  forty  years  at  present  being 
a  fair  period,— and  provision  will  be  made  for  the  reversion  to 
the  city  of  the  physical  property  of  the  company,  at  its  appraised 
value,  on  the  close  of  the  franchise  term.  Ordinarily  compensa- 
tion will  be  exacted  in  the  form  of  lower  charges  rather  than  in 
large  financial  returns. 

i  Rowe,  Problems  of  City  Government,  chap.  x. 


344          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

5 .  Municipal  finance.  To  carry  on  the  varied  functions  o5 
modern  city  life  an  extensive  municipal  revenue  is  demanded. 
Total  municipal  debts  and  expenditures  are,  in  some  states,  as 
great  as  those  of  the  national  government.  The  revenue  of  cities 
is  derived  mainly  from  the  income  of  public  property  and  public 
services,  from  grants  from  the  central  government,  and  from 
numerous  forms  of  local  taxation.  Unusual  expenditures  are  met 
by  loans.  The  control  which  the  central  authorities  exercise  over 
municipal  finance  varies,  being  more  extensive  in  France  than  in 
Great  Britain  or  Germany.  In  the  United  States  local  finance  is 
subject  to  little  administrative  control,  but  legislative  enactments 
impose  certain  restrictions. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XXIII 

REFERENCES 

IMPORTANCE  OF  COLONIAL  DEVELOPMENT 

1.  NEW  TYPE  OF  STATE 

2.  COLONIAL  PROBLEMS 

a.  Social 

b.  Economic 

c.  Political 

(1)  Relations  among  states  due  to  colonies 

(2)  Relations  of  states  to  their  colonies 

(3)  Effects  of  colonies  on  the  relations  of  states  to 

their  citizens 

HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  COLONIES 

1.  ANCIENT 

2.  MEDIEVAL 

3.  MODERN 

a.  Portuguese  and  Spanish 

b.  Dutch 

c.  French  and  English 

MOTIVES  OF  COLONIZATION 

1.  MOVEMENTS  OF  POPULATION 

2.  MISSIONARY  WORK 

3.  INDIVIDUAL  ENTERPRISE 

4.  COMMERCE  AND  COMMUNICATION 

5.  CAPITALISTIC  EXPANSION 

6.  POLITICS 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  COLONIAL  POLICY 

1.  ANCIENT  AND  MEDIEVAL 

2.  SPANISH  AND  PORTUGUESE 

3.  DUTCH 

4.  FRENCH 

5.  ENGLISH 

345 


/ 

346          INTRODUCTION*  T^O  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

*  '     •> 
COLONIAL  POLICY  OF  ENGLAND 

1.  CROWN  COLONIES 

2.  REPRESENTATIVE  COLONIES 

3.  RESPONSIBLE  COLONIES 

4.  IMPERIAL  FEDERATION 

COLONIAL  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 

1.  HISTORIC  DEVELOPMENT 

a.  From  1783  to  1853 

b.  From  1853  to  1898 

c.  Since  1898 

2.  PRESENT  POLICY 

a.  District  of  Columbia 

b.  The  territories 

(1)  Organized 

(2)  Unorganized 

c.  Samoa,  Guam,  and  Panama  Canal  strip 

d.  Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines 

FORMS  OF  COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT 

1.  SPHERES  OF  INFLUENCE 

2.  COLONIAL  PROTECTORATES 

3.  CHARTERED  COMPANIES 

4.  DIRECT  ADMINISTRATION 

5.  SELF-GOVERNMENT 


CHAPTER  XXIII 
COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  viii 

CALDECOTT,  A.  English  Colonization  and  Empire 

COLONIAL  ADMINISTRATION.  United  States  Bureau  of  Statistics 

COUBERTIN,  P.  The  Evolution  of  France  under  the  Third  Republic,  pp.  162-107 

DAY,  CLIVE.  The  Dutch  in  Java 

EGERTON,  H.  E.  Origin  and  Growth  of  English  Colonies 

HILL,  M.  Liberty  Documents,  chap,  xxiv 

IRELAND,  A.  Tropical  Colonization 

JORDAN,  D.  S.  Imperial  Democracy,  Nos.  Ill,  IV 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  Part  II,  chap,  vi 

LEWIS,  G.  C.  Government  of  Dependencies,  Introduction 

LOWELL,  A.  L.  The  Government  of  England,  Vol.  II,  chaps,  liv-lviii 

LUCAS,  C.  P.  Historical  Geography  of  the  British  Colonies 

MORRIS,  H.  C.  The  History  of  Colonization 

REID,  W.  Problems  of  Expansion 

REINSCH,  P.  S.  Colonial  Administration 

REINSCH,  P.  S.  Colonial  Government 

REINSCH,  P.  S.  World  Politics,  chaps,  i-v 

SEELEY,  J.  R.    The  Expansion  of  England 

SNOW,  A.  H.  The  Administration  of  Dependencies,  chaps,  xxiv-xxvii 

STATESMAN'S  YEAR-BOOK 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  F.  Territories  and  Dependencies  of  the  United  States 

130.  Importance  of  colonial  development.  The  past  century  has 
witnessed  a  transition  from  nationalism  to  national  imperialism.1 
Emphasis,  until  recently  placed  on  national  unity  and  self-sufficing 
life,  has  been  shifted  by  a  territorial  expansion  of  nations  and  by 
the  establishment  in  all  parts  of  the  earth  of  colonial  dependencies. 
These  perpetuate  the  national  spirit ;  in  fact,  they  often  intensify^ 
it  because  of  resultant  territorial  or  commercial  rivalries,  although 
they  are  breaking  down  the  natural  frontiers  and  ethnic  homogene- 
ity on  which  national  unity  was  originally  based.  As  compared  with 
the  ancient  city  state,  the  Roman  world  empire,  or  the  national 

1  Reinsch,  World  Politics,  Part  I. 

347 


348          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

state  of  the  eighteenth  century,  a  new  type  of  political  life  seems 
in  process  of  formation.  National  empires,  consisting  of  vast  and 
scattered  areas  inhabited  by  diverse  peoples,  whose  international 
relations  are  marked  by  keen  and  intense  rivalry  and  by  an  equi- 
librium of  power  preventing  the  preponderance  of  any,  combine 
many  of  the  characteristics  of  both  world  empire  and  national  state. 

Besides,  this  colonial  expansion  has  opened  up  many  difficult 
and  formerly  undreamed-of  problems.  The  civilization  and  educa- 
tion of  inferior  peoples,  and  the  responsibilities  thus  placed  upon 
more  enlightened  nations,  the  conflict  of  diverse  religious  ideas, 
and  the  dangers  inherent  in  unrestricted  immigration  represent  a 
few  of  the  imminent  social  questions  involved.  Similarly,  problems 
arise  concerning  industry  and  commerce.  Competition  in  business 
has  been  a  powerful  motive  in  the  establishment  of  colonies  and 
remains  a  constant  source  of  dispute  after  their  foundation.  Eco- 
nomic interests  are  of  increasing  importance  in  the  internal 
organization  of  states  and  in  their  international  dealings.  Most  of 
the  great  wars  of  the  past  two  centuries  have  been  caused  by 
commercial  rivalry ;  and  the  future  holds  little  promise  that  this 
source  of  difficulty  will  be  diminished. 

The  governmental  problems  involved  are  of  prime  importance 
to  the  student  of  political  science.  Colonial  development,  in  its 
influence  on  the  state,  affects  the  following  relations  : 

i .  Of  a  state  to  other  states.  It  is  evident  that  the  possession 
of  colonies,  whose  disputed  boundaries,  degrees  of  dependence, 
and  relations  with  states  other  than  those  to  which  they  belong 
give  rise  to  important  international  controversies,  demands  con- 
siderable remodeling  of  international  interests  and .  regulations. 
For  the  mastery  of  North  America  and  India,  England  and  France 
engaged  in  a  series  of  wars  lasting  over  a  century.  The  proximity 
of  Russian  and  English  interests  in  Asia  at  the  present  time 
causes  mutual  watchfulness  on  the  part  of  those  states ;  the  estab- 
lishment of  German  spheres  of  influence  in  South  America  was  a 
source  of  uneasiness  to  the  United  States ;  and  the  recent  desire 
for  expansion  on  the  part  of  Japan  brings  her  into  international 
prominence.  Besides,  colonial  development  has  profoundly  affected 
modes  of  warfare.  To  the  great  standing  armies  that  the  rise  of 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  349 

national  states  demanded,  immense  naval  armaments  have  been 
added  ;  and,  in  case  of  war,  capture  of  commerce  and  destruction 
of  property  rather  than  of  life  is  increasingly  aimed  at.  Among 
imperial  powers  naval  warfare  is  practically  decisive,  and  upon  its 
issue  depends  the  map  of  the  world. 

2.  Of  a  state  to  its  colonies.    This  relation  has  widely  varied. 
Sometimes  control  is  exercised  directly,  sometimes  by  organizations 
deriving  their  authority  from  a  superior  source.    At  times  the 
colonial   population  is  granted  no  self-government  and  few  civil 
rights  ;  again  they  are  practically  self-governing  and  enjoy  political 
privileges  even  greater  than  those  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  home 
state.    In   internal   organization  also  colonial  government  shows 
considerable  variation,  though  following  in  the  main  several  well- 
defined  types.    In  the  functions  performed  by  colonial  governments 
and  in  methods  of  administration  additional  differences  are  found. 
Among  the  important  questions  of  internal  administration  may 
be  noted  : 1 

(a)  Education  and  general  social  improvement. 

(b)  Finance,  currency,  banking,  and  credit. 

(c)  Commerce  and  communication. 

(d)  Land  policy  and  agricultural  and  industrial  development. 

(e)  The  labor  question. 

(f)  Defense  and  police. 

Each  of  these,  under  the  diverse  conditions  existing  in  modern 
colonies,  presents  certain  difficulties,  whose  solution  will  determine 
not  only  the  welfare  of  individuals  in  the  colonies,  but  the  position 
or  even  the  existence  of  the  state  itself. 

3 .  Of  a  state  to  its  citizens.    The  possession  of  colonies,  with 
the  problems  that  they  bring  in  international  and  colonial  affairs, 
must  react  on  the  internal  political  life  of  the  state  concerned.   To 
prove  this,  a  few  illustrations  will  suffice.    Colonial  questions  have 
long  been  a  leading  issue  in  the  politics  of  England,  and  the  recent 
growth  of  self-governing  colonies,  such  as  Canada,  South  Africa, 
Australia,  and  New  Zealand,  has  given  rise  to  the  imperial  fed- 
eration movement.2     Should  this  plan  be  put  into  practice,  the 
fundamental  organization  of  the  British  Empire  would  be  affected. 

1  Reinsch,  Colonial  Administration.  2  See  section  134. 


350         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  adoption  of  a  colonial  policy  by  the  United  States  has  unques- 
tionably had  considerable  influence  on  the  growing  importance  of 
national,  as  compared  with  commonwealth,  government,  and  on 
the  increasing  authority  of  the  executive.  The  disintegration  of 
political  parties  may  also  be  partly  due  to  the  fact  that  attention  is 
turned  more  to  external  than  to  internal  development,  and  that  differ- 
ences of  opinion,  valuable  in  deciding  policies  of  home  concern, 
become  dangerous  if  the  policy  of  the  state  in  dealing  with  other 
states  is  thereby  weakened.  At  all  events,  the  practical  amendment 
of  the  United ,  States  Constitution,  resulting  from  the  Supreme 
Court  decision  in  the  Insular  Cases  (1901),  shows  an  unquestioned 
reaction  of  colonial  policy  on  internal  organization. 

The  importance  of  colonial  development  is  vividly  indicated  by 
the  mere  figures  reached  in  the  area  and  population  of  existing 
colonies.  Two  fifths  of  the  land  surface  of  the  globe  is  included  ! 
in  colonial  possessions,  and  their  population  aggregates  over  five 
hundred  millions.  England's  colonies  alone  cover  an  area  of  over 
eleven  million  square  miles  and  have  a  population  of  over  three 
hundred  and  fifty  millions.  The  French  possessions  have  a  com- 
bined area  eighteen  times  as  great  as  France  itself,  and  their 
population  is  half  again  as  large  as  that  of  the  homeland.  Even 
the  United  States,  the  most  recent  recruit  to  the  imperial  powers, 
has  colonies  with  a  total  area  of  one  hundred  and  fifty-four 
thousand  square  miles  and  a  population  of  over  nine  millions. 

131.  Historical  development  of  colonies.  The  development  of 
colonies  is  one  phase  of  the  general  process  by  which  the  whole 
earth  has  been  explored  and  brought  under  organized  political 
regulation,  and  by  which  its  population  has  been  redistributed.  In 
the  territorial  growth  of  states  two  main  methods  have  been 
followed.  One  is  that  of  gradual  contiguous  expansion,  as  in  the 
case  of  Rome,  or,  more  recently,  of  Russia  and  the  United  States. 
The  other  is  the  acquisition  of  remote  and  scattered  possessions, 
as  in  the  case  of  Spain  during  the  sixteenth  century  or  of  the 
present  British  Empire.  Similarly,  movements  of  peoples  show 
several  main  types.  The  migrations  of  early  peoples  were  quite 
different  from  the  later  colonization  that  peopled  the  New  World  ; 
and  both  of  these  differed  from  the  immigration  of  the  present  day. 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT 

In  its  political  sense  the  term  "  colony  "  is  used  to  indicate  a  body 
of  people  occupying  territory  outside  the  boundaries  of  the  state 
proper  and  yet  retaining  political  allegiance  to  it.  This  usage 
would  not  permit  one  to  speak,  as  in  the  ethnological  sense,  of  the 
United  States  as  a  British  colony  or  of  Quebec  as  a  French  colony. 
The  term  "  colony  "  is,  however,  broadened  to  include  what  are  some- 
times more  specifically  called  "  dependencies,"  —  that  is,  possessions 
of  a  state,  the  greater  part  of  whose  inhabitants  are  natives,  with 
only  a  small  .'proportion  of  "colonists."  Of  this  type  India  and 
the  Philippines  are  examples.  Accordingly,  a  colony  may  be  defined 
as  "an  outlying  possession  of  a  national  state,  the  administration 
of  which  is  carried  on  under  a  system  distinct  from,  but  subordinate 
to,  the  government  of  the  national  territory."  1 

The  first  colonizing  people  of  importance  were  the  Phoenicians. 
Located  on  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean,  between  Egypt  and 
Mesopotamia,  their  situation  was  favorable  for  trade  ,  and,  in  seek- 
ing markets  and  raw  material,  trading  posts  were  established.  Of 
these,  Carthage,  a  permanent  agricultural  settlement  as  well  as  a 
trading  post,  was  the  most  important;  and  it  in  turn  extended 
its  influence  over  adjacent  islands  and  even  in  Spain,  until  at 
length  its  growing  power  was  crushed  by  Rome.  Meanwhile 
Greece  was  sending  out  colonies.  The  Dorian  invasions  and, 
later,  the  attacks  of  the  Persians  drove  many  fugitives  to  seek  new 
homes.  Growth  of  population,  extension  of  trade,  and  especially 
the  factional  strife  within  the  Greek  cities  led  to  the  expansion  of 
Greece  over  the  adjacent  islands,  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  and 
westward  to  Sicily  and  southern  Italy.  Soon  after  this  Rome,  in 
extending  her  jurisdiction  by  force  of  arms  and  by  establishing 
co Ionia  on  conquered  territory,  laid  the  basis  for  her  world  empire. 

In  the  Middle  Ages  the  only  colonies  were  those  established  by 
some  of  the  Italian  cities.  They  alone,  during  the  disintegration 
of  western  Europe,  retained  industrial  and  commercial  life ;  and, 
after  freeing  themselves  from  the  overlordship  of  emperor  and 
pope,  they  developed  an  active,  restless  life  similar  to  that  of  the 
ancient  Greek  cities.  Trading  posts  in  the  Orient  were  established 
by  Pisa,  Florence,  and  especially  by  Genoa  and  Venice.  These 

1  Reinsch,  Colonial  Government,  p.  16. 


352         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

cities,  profiting  by  the  crusades,  controlled  the  trade  of  Europe 
until,  at  the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  activity  of  the  Portu- 
guese, the  discovery  of  America,  the  conquests  of  the  Turks,  and 
the  general  expansion  and  shifting  of  trade  left  them  at  a 
disadvantage  and  cost  them  their  scattered  colonies. 

Modern  colonization  began  with  the  discovery  of  a  sea  route  to 
the  East  Indies  and  the  opening  up  of  the  New  World.  During 
the  century  from  1500  to  1600  Portugal  and  Spain  alone  took 
active  part  in  this  process.  The  Portuguese,  sailing  around  the 
Cape  of  Good  Hope,  established  themselves  on  the  coast  of  Africa, 
in  India,  among  the  East  Indies,  and  even  reached  China  and  Japan. 
Brazil,  which  had  been  accidentally  discovered  by  a  Portuguese  ship 
on  its  journey  around  the  Cape,  was  comparatively  neglected ;  but 
by  feudal  grants  of  land  to  Portuguese  nobles,  by  the  efforts  of  the 
Jesuits,  and  by  fugitive  Jews  and  criminals,  Portuguese  authority 
was  there  established.  Portugal  was  thus  supreme  on  the  seas  and 
the  possessor  of  vast  territories  until  her  liberty  was  lost  to  Spain 
(1580)  and  her  possessions  became  the  prey  of  all  Spain's  foes. 

Spain,  under  whose  auspices  the  New  World  was  discovered, 
had  just  finished  her  long  contest  with  the  Moors ;  and  the 
Spanish  nobles  and  soldiers  out  of  occupation,  together  with  the 
clergy  zealous  for  new  fields  of  activity,  naturally  turned  to  the  New 
World  for  adventure  and  profit.  By  grant  of  the  pope  (1493)  the 
non-Christian  world  was  divided  between  Portugal  and  Spain,  and 
Spain  proceeded  vigorously  to  conquer  and  Christianize  her  west- 
ern share.  Through  the  efforts  of  conquerors,  such  as  Cortez  and 
Pizarro,  and  through  the  missions  of  the  Jesuits,  Spanish  authority 
was  extended  over  the  West  Indies,  the  Gulf  coast,  Mexico, 
Central  and  South  America,  and  finally,  by  discovery,  over  the 
Philippine  archipelago.  As  long  as  Spain  controlled  the  seas  her 
colonial  empire  was  maintained  and  furnished  enormous  wealth 
for  her  treasury ;  but  the  rise  of  Holland  and  England  as  naval 
powers,  together  with  Spain's  repressive  methods  of  colonial  ad- 
ministration and  her  own  internal  decline,  led  to  the  capture  of 
some  of  her  colonies,  the  winning  of  independence  by  others,  and 
recently  the  loss  of  the  remainder,  except  for  a  few  fragments  in 
Africa,  after  the  Spanish- American  War. 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT 

The  rise  of  the  Dutch  colonial  empire  presented  several  new 
features.  In  their  long  and  bitter  war  against  Spain  the  Dutch 
not  only  won  their  independence,  but  increased  their  wealth  and 
commerce ;  and,  in  attacking  Spanish-Portuguese  power  through 
its  colonies,  they  built  up  a  colonial  empire.  In  1580  Portugal 
came  under  Spanish  jurisdiction,  and  Holland,  whose  industries 
were  dependent  upon  supplies  drawn  from  the  East  through  Por- 
tugal, was  shut  out  by  Spain  from  trade  with  the  Iberian  penin- 
sula. As  a  result,  the  Dutch,  while  waging  a  desperate  war  on 
land,  turned  boldly  to  the  sea,  and,  attacking  the  feeders  of  Spanish 
power,  laid  the  basis  for  their  present  colonial  empire  in  the  East 
Indies.  The  defeat  of  the  Spanish  Armada  by  England  was  a 
fortunate  coincidence,  and  by  1600  the  Netherlands  had  become 
the  great  commercial  power  in  the  Orient.  Inspired  by  this  suc- 
cess, other  Dutch  merchants  began  the  invasion  of  the  West. 
Several  islands  of  the  West  Indies  group,  Dutch  Guiana  on  the 
north  coast  of  South  America,  and  the  settlements  around  Man- 
hattan and  on  the  Hudson  were  the  chief  fields  of  their  activity. 
During  the  eighteenth  century  the  Dutch  colonies  declined.  Mis- 
government  ruined  the  colonies  and  injured  the  homeland  ;  Eng- 
land became  the  chief  naval  power ;  the  United  States  secured 
much  of  the  Dutch  carrying  trade  ;  and  for  a  time  the  Netherlands 
were  brought  under  the  sway  of  Napoleon.  During  the  past  cen- 
tury Holland  has  regained  a  prominent  position  in  colonial  affairs  ; 
and  while  many  of  its  former  dependencies  were  relinquished  to 
England,  its  present  possessions,  the  most  important  of  which  are 
the  East  Indies,  cover  an  area  of  seven  hundred  and  eighty- three 
thousand  square  miles  and  have  a  population  of  about  thirty-six 
millions,  of  whom,  however,  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  are 
whites. 

France  and  England,  while  sharing  in  the  early  discoveries  and 
explorations,  took  no  steps  toward  the  establishment  of  colonies 
until  the  seventeenth  century.  Then  they  became  active  and  bitter 
rivals.  In  America,  French  adventurers,  traders,  and  missionaries 
settled  the  St.  Lawrence  and  Mississippi  valleys ;  while  English 
colonists,  with  little  encouragement  from  the  homeland,  estab- 
lished themselves  along  the  Atlantic  coast.  As  these  settlements 


354          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

expanded,  the  inevitable  conflict,  fought  out  in  a  series  of  wars  last- 
ing over  one  hundred  years,  resulted  in  the  expulsion  of  France 
from  America ;  although,  in  the  course  of  this  contest,  because  of 
England's  colonial  and  commercial  methods,  the  most  valuable 
of  her  American  colonies  revolted  and  secured  their  independence. 
Similarly,  in  India  the  two  states  were  rivals  and  there  also  the 
English  were  successful.  Meanwhile  the  naval  supremacy  which 
England  attained  during  the  wars  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries  enabled  her  to  wrest  colonial  possessions  from  Spain  and 
Holland  as  well  as  from  France,  and  to  lay  the  foundation  for  her 
present  widespread  empire. 

During  the  past  century  colonial  empires  have  expanded  until 
practically  all  the  inhabitable  parts  of  the  earth  are  parceled  out 
among  the  leading  states.  The  islands  of  the  Pacific,  large  tracts 
in  Asia,  and  the  continent  of  Africa  have  been  the  chief  fields  of 
recent  activity.  England  has  extended  her  control  over  India,  and, 
through  the  work  of  her  explorers  and  settlers,  has  opened  up  new 
lands.  Australia,  at  first  a  convict  settlement,  has  become  a  pros- 
perous and  progressive  colony  and,  with  New  Zealand,  has  become 
famous  for  its  experiments  in  social  reform.  In  Africa,  England 
secured  Cape  Colony  from  the  Dutch  during  the  Napoleonic 
period,  and  her  gradual  expansion  northward  came  to  a  climax  in 
the  recent  Boer  War,  by  which  she  secured  additional  territory. 
The  completion  of  the  Suez  Canal,  opening  a  short  route  to  India, 
has  led  England  to  secure  possessions  in  the  eastern  Mediterranean 
and  in  Arabia ;  and,  interfering  in  Egypt,  she  has  pushed  south- 
ward until,  with  the  newly  acquired  German  lands,  it  will  be 
possible  to  build  the  Cape-to-Cairo  Railroad  exclusively  in  British 
territory.  Other  possessions  in  Africa  and  many  scattered  islands 
and  coast  towns  are  included  in  the  British  Empire,  —  the  whole 
covering  one  fifth  of  the  land  surface  of  the  globe. 

France,  since  the  loss  of  her  American  and  Indian  colonies, 
has  turned  her  attention  to  Africa  and  holds  almost  all  the  north 
coast,  the  greater  part  of  the  Sahara  desert  and  of  the  valley  of 
the  Niger,  central  Africa  north  of  the  Kongo,  and  the  island  of 
Madagascar.  France  has  also  acquired  extensive  possessions  in 
Indo-China  and  holds  scattered  islands  in  many  parts  of  the  earth. 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  355 

Her  dependencies  cover  an  area  of  four  million,  two  hundred 
thousand  square  miles  and  have  a  population  of  fifty-six  millions. 
Germany,  in  1884  and  the  following  years,  acquired  various  protec- 
torates and  spheres  of  influence,  especially  in  Africa,  China,  and 
the  Pacific.  These  possessions  were  taken  from  her  at  the  close 
of  the  recent  war  and  were  distributed,  chiefly  as  mandates,  to  the 
British  Empire,  Australia,  New  Zealand,  and  Japan.  The  disposal 
of  the  Shantung  province  in  China  has  been  the  most  troublesome 
problem  created  in  this  process.  Portugal  retains  a  remnant  of  her 
former  possessions  in  Africa,  and  Italy  and  Belgium  have  also  shared 
in  its  partition.  Recently  the  United  States  has  entered  the  field 
of  colonial  expansion,  and,  by  the  Spanish  War  and  by  annexation 
and  occupation,  has  secured  Porto  Rico,  the  Hawaiian  group,  the 
Philippines,  and  other  islands.  Protectorates  and  spheres  of  influ- 
ence have  also  been  established  in  the  Caribbean  region. 

132.  Motives  of  colonization.  After  the  preceding  outline  of 
the  origin  and  distribution  of  colonies  from  a  territorial  standpoint, 
a  brief  summary  may  be  made  of  the  motives  that  have  led  to  the 
foundation  of  colonies  and  of  the  methods  by  which  they  have 
been  established.  The  following  are  among  the  most  important : l 

i.  Movements  of  population.  Mere  growth  of  population,  caus- 
ing overcrowding,  is  an  important,  though  often  overestimated, 
factor  in  the  migration  of  peoples.  In  the  colonies  established  by 
the  Greek  cities  and  in  the  present  exodus  of  the  rapidly  increas- 
ing German  population,  this  cause  may  be  traced.  More  important 
is  dissatisfaction  with  existing  economic,  political,  or  religious  con- 
ditions. The  establishment  of  the  Puritans  in  New  England  and 
the  more  recent  emigration  of  the  Irish  and  of  the  Russian  Jews 
are  typical  examples  of  such  movements.  Sometimes  emigration 
is  induced  or  forced  by  the  colonizing  state,  as  was  the  case  in 
some  of  the  French  colonies  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  in 
the  sending  of  indentured  servants  and  the  founding  of  penal 
settlements  by  England.  In  modern  colonies  the  proportion  of  the 
entire  population  composed  of  immigrants  from  the  home  states 
is  comparatively  small,  the  major  part  consisting  of  natives  or 
descendants  from  former  colonists. 

i  Reinsch,  Colonial  Government,  Part  I. 


356          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

2.  Missionary  work.    Ever  since  the  discovery  of  America  the 
zeal  to  convert  the  heathen  has,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  pre- 
ceded or  accompanied  colonial  expansion.    The  work  of  Spanish, 
Portuguese,  and  French  priests  in  the  early  history  of  America  at 
once  suggests  itself ;  and,  more  recently,  missions  have  paved  the 
way  for  England's  foothold  in  Australia,  Guiana,  and  South  and 
Central  Africa.    France  began  her  intervention  in  Cochin-China 
on  account  of  French  missionaries,  and  exercises  a  powerful  in- 
fluence in  the  region  of  the  eastern  Mediterranean,  through  the 
protectorate  she  maintains  there  over  Roman  Catholic  missions. 
Italy,  Germany,  and  Russia  are  also  supporting  missionary  activity 
in  the  Levant  as  stepping-stones  to  future  political  power.    In 
China   spheres  of  influence  were  established,  at  least  by  Ger- 
many and  France,  as  the  result  of  intervention  after  the  murder 
of  missionaries ;  and  in  some  parts  of  Africa  serious  obstacles  are 
placed  in  the  way  of  missionaries  of  states  other  than  those  to 
whom  the  territory  belongs,  frequent  assertions  of  the  political 
activities  of  missionaries  being  made. 

3.  Individual  enterprise.    The   spirit  of  adventure   frequently 
leads  men  to  seek  new  fields  for  their  exploits,  and  new  lands  are 
thus  discovered  and  opened  up.    When  conditions  become  settled 
and  national  boundaries  are  well  defined,  restless  spirits  set  out  to 
explore  and  conquer  new  realms.     This   tendency  characterized 
the  sixteenth  century  and  is  again  noticeable  at  the  present  time. 
Interest  in  exploration  marked  the  discoverers  of  the  New  World 
and  paved  the  way  for  the  partition  of  Africa.    Desire  for  wealth 
or  power  has  been  a  constant  motive  from  De  Soto  and  Cortez 
down  to  Warren  Hastings  and  Cecil  Rhodes.   Government  officials, 
civil  or  military,  stationed  on  the  outposts  of  their  states'  posses- 
sions, are  frequently  tempted  to  undertake  expeditions  that  their 
states  would  hesitate  to  authorize,  but  whose  benefits  they  are 
usually  ready  to  accept.    When  trade  and  capital  follow  the  paths 
of  adventurous  individuals,  protection  by  the  state  soon  passes  into 
political  control. 

4.  Commerce  and  communication.   The  desire  for  trade  has 
always  been  a  powerful  motive  in  colonial  expansion.    Carthage, 
Greece,  and  Venice  had  trading  ports  along  the  coasts  of  the 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  357 

Mediterranean  in  ancient  times  ;  Portugal,  Holland,  and  England 
have  contended  for  the  profitable  products  of  the  Spice  Islands  ; 
and  French  fishermen  and  fur  traders  were  among  the  first  per- 
manent settlers  in  the  New  World.  Merchant  adventurers  and 
great  colonial  commercial  companies  established  British  dominion 
in  America  and  in  India.  To-day  an  important  motive  in  acquiring 
territory  is  the  necessity  for  disposing  of  surplus  production,  and 
states  still  try  to  monopolize  the  commerce  of  their  colonies.  In 
addition  to  the  community  of  customs,  language,  and  laws,  which 
make  colonies  a  natural  market  for  the  homeland,  tariff  restric- 
tions, as  in  the  French  possessions,  or  preferential  rates,  as  in 
the  colonies  of  England  and  in  the  Philippines,  influence  the 
movement  of  trade. 

The  necessity  for  keeping  open  easy  means  of  communication 
for  this  world  commerce,  and  of  securing  bases  of  supply  for 
navies  has  led  to  extensive  acquisition  of  scattered  colonies.  Eng- 
land's trade  route  to  India  led  her  to  acquire  South  Africa,  to 
control  the  Suez  Canal,  and  to  secure  extensive  interests  in  the 
eastern  Mediterranean  and  in  Egypt.  The  desire  of  Russia  for  an 
outlet  to  the  sea  has  resulted  in  international  complications  con- 
cerning the  Baltic,  the  Black  Sea,  and  the  Pacific.  Both  the 
westward  continental  expansion  of  the  United  States  and  the 
recent  acquisition  of  island  dependencies  have  been  influenced  by 
this  same  need  of  communication.  Singapore,  Hongkong,  and 
similar  centers  owe  their  importance  to  the  fact  that  they  are  the 
depots  of  Asiatic  commerce,  and  many  barren  islands  are  of 
strategic  value  as  naval  coaling  stations. 

5.  Capitalistic  expansion.  Since  the  Industrial  Revolution  the 
internal  resources  of  the  most  advanced  states  have  been  rapidly 
developed  and  a  growing  surplus  of  capital  has  accumulated. 
England  found  herself  in  this  position  a  century  ago,  and,  at 
present,  capital  in  the  Netherlands,  France,  and  the  United  States  is 
also  seeking  profitable  investment.  New  lands  with  undeveloped 
resources  offer  the  greatest  opportunities  ;  hence  the  recent  build- 
ing of  railroads,  opening  up  of  mines,  development  of  agriculture, 
and  the  establishment  of  industries  in  remote  parts  of  the  earth. 
This  movement  has  had  important  political  results.  Not  only  do 


358          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

capitalists  naturally  desire  the  protection  of  their  state  extended 
over  their  investments,  but  the  development  of  resources,  reaching 
into  the  interior  of  new  regions,  necessitates  more  extensive  inter- 
ference than  the  former  coast  trade  demanded,  and  protection  for 
capital  easily  shades  off  into  spheres  of  influence,  protectorates, 
and  dependencies.  The  vast  interests  of  English  capitalists  in  all 
parts  of  the  earth,  American  investments  in  Mexico  and  Central 
America,  the  interests  of  France  in  Russia,  and  the  concessions 
to  foreign  capitalists  in  various  sections  of  China,  —  all  suggest 
important  problems  for  the  future. 

6.  Politics.  Colonies  have  sometimes  been  established  for 
political  motives  by  the  direct  initiative  of  states.  Such  settlements 
have  aimed  to  extend  national  territory  and  prestige,  to  hold  lands 
previously  claimed,  or  to  prevent  the  expansion  of  rival  powers. 
In  ancient  times  the  Romans  founded  colonies  for  political  motives  ; 
in  the  seventeenth  century  France,  largely  because  of  national 
pride,  attempted  to  build  up  a  colonial  empire  in  America,  and 
her  recent  expansion  in  North  Africa  indicates  a  similar  motive ; 
many  of  the  territorial  additions  made  by  England  in  Africa  and 
by  Russia  in  Asia  are  of  the  same  type.  At  present  many  states 
consider  their  territorial  bases  too  limited,  and  national  rivalries 
lead  them  to  desire  to  control  as  large  a  portion  of  the  earth's 
surface  as  opportunity  will  permit.  Frequently  such  colonies  are 
of  no  great  value  in  themselves,  and  may  even  be  heavy  burdens 
on  the  colonizing  states. 

As  a  result,  earlier  colonial  expansion,  largely  the  work  of 
individuals  and  carried  on  with  no  preconceived  plan,  is  being 
replaced  by  far-reaching  schemes  of  national  expansion.  The  con- 
struction of  railways,  the  building  of  navies,  the  movements  of 
armed  forces,  together  with  the  insistence  upon  opportunity  for 
trade  and  investment,  show  the  energies  of  modern  national 
states  in  building  up  national  empires.  Already  the  nations  have 
preempted  areas  far  in  excess  of  their  present  needs  or  their 
ability  to  assimilate.  Not  only  have  those  parts  of  the  earth  unin- 
habited by  civilized  peoples  been  partitioned  among  the  great 
powers,  but  even  the  homes  of  old  and  flourishing  civilizations 
are  considered  fair  fields  for  protectorates  and  spheres  of  influence. 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  359 

133.  Development  of  colonial  policy.  Colonies  of  the  ancient 
world  were  usually  either  mere  trading  stations  or  settlements 
whose  political  allegiance  to  the  home  country  was  very  slight. 
Accordingly,  colonial  government  in  the  proper  sense  did  not 
exist.  Athens  for  a  time  exercised  control  over  the  cities  compos- 
ing the  Delian  League,  and  the  Roman  soldiers  who  formed  the 
colonia  retained  their  Roman  citizenship.  However,  in  neither 
case  were  true  colonial  empires  established,  the  former  falling  to 
pieces  and  the  latter  merging  into  a  centralized  state.  Again,  in 
the  Middle  Ages  the  trading  posts  established  by  the  Italian  cities 
were  unlike  modern  colonies,  as  little  attempt  was  made  to  govern 
the  inhabitants,  the  Italian  cities  being  satisfied  if  the  interests  of 
their  own  merchants  were  safeguarded. 

With  the  discoveries  of  the  fifteenth  century  modern  coloniza- 
tion began,  and  the  general  features  that  characterized  the  colonial 
policy  of  Spain  and  Portugal  were  developed  amid  the  conquests 
and  adventures  accompanying  the  opening  up  of  the  New  World. 
Colonies  were  regarded  only  as  sources  of  profit  for  the  home 
states ;  their  own  development  or  the  welfare  of  their  inhabitants 
was  of  secondary  consideration.  Self-government  was  not  permit- 
ted, and  elaborate  regulations  surrounded  commerce  and  industry. 
Colonies  were  governed  directly  from  the  mother  country  by  means 
of  a  centralized  system  of  officials,  few  of  whom  were  permanent 
colonists.  Laws  were  made  with  little  understanding  of  conditions 
in  the  colonies,  and  immigration  was  limited  to  citizens  of  Spain 
and  Portugal  who  were  members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church. 
Trade  in  the  Spanish  colonies  was,  with  few  exceptions,  limited  to 
Spanish  merchants  and  ships,  and  these  in  turn  were  under  the 
control  of  the  Casa  de  Contractacion,  the  great  organization  that 
possessed  the  monopoly.  Ships  traveled  in  fleets  once  a  year  from 
one  or  two  ports,  and  restrictions  both  inconvenient  and  burden- 
some placed  a  premium  upon  smuggling.  While  the  magnitude 
of  the  task  confronting  these  pioneer  colonial  states,  and  the  value 
of  their  work,  especially  that  of  the  Jesuits,  in  at  least  sowing  the 
seeds  of  civilization,  is  seldom  appreciated,  it  is  evident  that  their 
system  was  doomed  to  failure.  The  colonies  were  impoverished, 
their  race  stock  degenerated,  and  corruption  in  government  and 


360          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  burden  of  industrial  and  commercial  restrictions  led  to  revolt 
and  final  independence. 

Holland,  France,  and  England,  the  colonial  powers  of  the  seven- 
teenth and  eighteenth  centuries,  while  holding  to  the  general  theory 
that  colonies  existed  for  the  benefit  of  the  home  state,  who  should 
govern  them  and  control  their  trade,  made  numerous  improve- 
ments in  colonial  methods.  In  the  absence  of  well-filled  national 
treasuries  and  a  wealthy  nobility,  both  state  and  individual  initia- 
tive were  difficult.  Instead,  chartered  companies  were  granted 
rights  to  hold  land,  monopolize  trade,  and  exercise  governing 
authority  in  certain  areas,  and  by  their  efforts  the  basis  of  colonial 
empire  was  laid. 

The  Dutch  East  India  Company,  chartered  in  1602,  was  granted 
the  monopoly  of  trade  and  the  right  to  govern  in  the  East  Indies. 
Its  efforts  were  directed  to  increase  Dutch  trade  in  the  Orient, 
and  it  founded  no  colonies  for  motives  of  religion,  conquest,  or 
civilization.  Stations  were  usually  located  on  islands  rather  than 
on  the  mainland,  and  comparatively  few  colonists  went  out  from 
Holland.  Thus  a  great  aristocratic  corporation  grew  up  within  the 
Dutch  state,  and  for  over  a  century  it  enjoyed  remarkable  pros- 
perity. In  the  eighteenth  century  it  declined.  Attention  was 
devoted  exclusively  to  spices,  tyranny  and  corruption  on  the  part 
of  officials  caused  disaffection  among  the  natives,  and  antiquated 
regulations  restricted  trade.  An  inquiry  into  the  accounts  of  the 
company,  ordered  by  the  States  General  in  1 789,  showed  enormous 
debts,  and  at  the  end  of  the  century  the  company  ceased  its  activi- 
ties, gave  up  its  lands  to  the  state,  and  was  legally  dissolved.  Dur- 
ing the  past  century,  under  state  control,  the  colonies  of  Holland 
have  again  become  prosperous. 

The  French  government,  while  also  chartering  companies,  real- 
ized the  possibilities  of  colonial  empire,  and  gave  constant  en- 
couragement and  aid.  The  French  colonies  were  handicapped, 
however,  by  the  comparatively  small  number  of  colonists  who  came 
out  from  France,  by  the  religious  restrictions  placed  on  immigrants, 
and  by  the  scattered  settlements,  interested  in  immediate  gain 
rather  than  in  permanent  occupation.  The  paternal  policy  of  the 
French  government,  sometimes  neglectful  and  again  overindulgent 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  361 

in  expenditures  for  colonial  purposes,  prevented  the  colonies  from 
becoming  self-supporting.  In  accordance  with  the  theory  of  that 
time,  colonial  trade  was  monopolized  for  the  benefit  of  France,  and 
the  centralized  bureaucracy  that  controlled  colonial  policy  cared 
little  for  the  welfare  of  the  colonists.  The  internal  difficulties  that 
beset  France,  her  interest  in  military  rather  than  naval  strength, 
and  her  long  contest  with  England  deprived  her  of  the  greater 
part  of  her  original  colonies.  Recently  France  has  gone  to  the 
other  extreme  in  her  colonial  policy.  While  retaining  much  of  the 
red  tape  of  her  former  centralized  system,  she  treats  her  colonists, 
most  of  whom  are  natives,  as  if  they  were  Europeans.  France 
alone  admits  colonial  representatives  to  her  national  legislature  ; 
and  while  the  present  French  colonies  are  a  heavy  financial  burden, 
no  state  is  more  interested  in  colonial  problems  or  more  ambitious 
for  colonial  empire  than  is  France. 

In  contrast  to  the  colonies  of  France,  England's  first  colonies 
grew  up  neglected.  Composed  largely  of  religious  and  political 
refugees  or  of  persons  excluded  from  the  Spanish  and  French  colo- 
nies, they  formed  permanent  settlements  and  became  strong  in 
spite  of  England's  lack  of  interest  in  colonial  enterprise.  Charters 
were  issued  to  companies  or  grants  made  to  individuals  with  little 
knowledge  of  the  possibilities  involved,  and  with  but  feeble 
attempts  to  retain  control.  By  the  migration  of  the  officers  and 
members  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Company  to  America,  the 
charter  intended  for  the  governing  of  a  trading  company  became  a 
constitution  for  colonial  self-government,  and  England's  difficulties 
at  home  during  the  greater  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  pre- 
vented active  interference  with  the  growing  strength  and  inde- 
pendence of  her  new  possessions.  Not  until  American  trade 
became  of  importance  to  British  merchants,  and  rivalry  with  Hol- 
land and  France  involved  colonial  interests,  did  England  pay  much 
attention  to  her  oversea  settlements.  Tlien^..  in  arrnrdanrp  with 
the  prevailing  Mercantile  Theory,  a  series  of  Navigation  Acts,  aim- 
ing to  exclude  other  states  from  the  trade  of  the  colonies,  demanded 
a  monopolyjEor  EnglisTrlTiei^ants^^d^ship^ngT^  These  acts, 


while  causing  some  hardship,  were  systematically_^yacl£d>_anjiJn 
some  respects,  at  least,  were  of  mutual  benefit.    Later  attempts  to 


362          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

restrict  American  manufactures  and  to  levy  direct  taxes  for  the 
defraying  of  expenses  incurred  in  the  long  colonial  wars  with 
France  caused  greater  disaffection.  Back  of  all  these  were  the 
inevitable  differences  caused  by  conditions  in  England  and  in  the 
colonies,  intensified  by  constant  conflicts  between  the  colonial  gov- 
ernors, representing  the  crown,  and  the  assemblies,  representing 
the  colonists.  Finally,  the  American  Revolution,  really  an  episode 
in  the  long  contest  between  England  and  France  for  world  suprem- 
acy, and  between  king  and  people  for  sovereignty  in  England,  led 
to  the  independence  of  the  American  colonies  and  to  a  radical 
change  in  British  colonial  policy. 

At  first  England  attempted  to  strengthen  her  control  over  the 
remaining  colonies,  but  a  number  of  causes  were  leading  to  the 
present  system  of  colonial  self-government.  The  free-trade  move- 
ment that  swept  England  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century  removed  the  commercial  restrictions  on  which  previous 
colonial  policy  had  been  based.  Increasing  democratic  spirit 
affected  the  colonies  as  well  as  the  homeland ;  in  fact,  many 
leading  English  thinkers  looked  forward  to  the  time  when  all  the 
British  colonies  inhabited  by  enlightened  peoples  would  follow  the 
example  of  the  United  States  and  establish  independent  states.  It 
was  therefore  the  duty  of  England  to  train  them  in  self-government 
and  prepare  them  for  their  "  manifest  destiny."  Naturally,  then, 
as  colonies  grew  in  population  and  intelligence,  both  justice  and 
policy,  as  well  as  the  experience  of  the  American  Revolution, 
demanded  that  the  colonies  be  given  a  share  in  government,  and 
that  their  interests  and  not  those  of  England  alone  should  be 
considered. 

At  present  Japan,  Italy,  and  Holland  grant  small  powers  of 
self-government  to  their  colonies.  Administration  is  carried  on  by 
governors  and  commissioners  appointed  by  the  home  state,  the 
small  proportion  of  European  population  making  the  application 
of  the  elective  principle  inadvisable.  France,  in  those  colonies 
where  the  proportion  of  European  population  is  small,  governs 
through  appointed  officials  or  through  military  authorities.  In  some 
of  the  older  colonies  elected  councils  are  permitted ;  several  of  the 
colonies  are  represented  in  the  French  Senate  and  Chamber  of 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT 


363 


Deputies;  and  Algeria  is  divided  into  departments  and  governed 
as  a  part  of  France.  The  present  colonial  policy  of  England  and 
of  the  United  States  will  be  discussed  in  the  following  sections. 

134.  Colonial  policy  of  England.  Great  Britain  has  never  defi- 
nitely established  a  colonial  system,  neither  has  she  laid  down 
general  principles  of  colonial  policy  and  attempted  to  adapt  the 
government  of  her  dependencies  to  them.  Her  colonies  differ  in 
size,  population,  military  or  naval  importance,  wealth,  race,  and 
civilization,  and  have  been  acquired  by  various  means.  As  a  result 
colonial  administration  has  been  adapted  to  circumstances  and 
modified  by  experience,  self-government  being  granted  in  propor- 
tion to  the  number  of  white  inhabitants  and  the  degree  of  civiliza- 
tion. In  the  details  of  their  government  present  British  colonies 
exhibit  all  degrees  of  dependence,  but  a  general  classification,  that 
adopted  by  the  British  Colonial  Office,1  may  be  given  : 

I.  Crown  colonies.  In  these  the  crown  has  entire  control  of 
legislation,  while  administration  is  carried  on  by  public  officers 
under  the  control  of  the  home  government.  No  pretense  of  popu- 
lar government  exists ;  the  welfare  of  the  native  inhabitants  as 
modified  by  the  presence  of  British  colonists  is  aimed  at,  and  in 
the  great  military  and  naval  stations  even  this  is  subordinated  to 
the  commercial  or  strategic  importance  of  the  colony.  The  gov- 
ernor and  his  officials,  appointed  by  the  crown,  rule  the  colony, 
sometimes  with  the  advice  of  resident  colonists  who  are  appointed 
to  membership  in  the  council.  Included  in  this  class  are  the  Straits 
Settlements,  Trinidad,  Honduras,  Sierra  Leone,  and  others,  together 
with  such  stations  as  Gibraltar,  Hongkong,  Singapore,  and  Aden. 

The  Indian  Empire,  while  not  considered  a  colony,  is,  in  so  far 
as  it  is  governed  at  all,  administered  directly  by  agents  of  the 
crown.  About  seventy  millions  of  its  population  are  included  in 
the  native  states,  over  which  only  a  negative  control  is  exercised. 
They  contain  advisory  British  residents,  and  may  not  make  war  or 
hold  diplomatic  intercourse  with  one  another  or  with  outside  states. 
Subject  to  such  restrictions,  however,  they  are  governed  according 
to  their  own  customs  and  laws  by  native  princes,  although  these 
latter  may  be  removed  by  British  authority,  if  necessary,  and  some 

1  Colonial  Office  List,  1901. 


364          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

are  required  to  pay  annual  tribute.  The  remainder  of  the  three 
hundred  millions  are  included  in  British  India  proper.  Its  govern- 
ment is  controlled  by  the  crown,  represented  by  the  Secretary  of 
State  for  India,  who  is  assisted  by  a  council  of  former  residents  in 
India,  holding  office  for  ten  years.  No  member  of  the  council  may 
sit  in  Parliament.  This  home  government  is  represented  in  India 
by  a  governor-general,  or  viceroy,  appointed  by  the  crown,  assisted 
by  an  executive  council  similarly  appointed,  whose  members  act  as 
heads  of  the  departments  of  administration.  The  legislative  coun- 
cil of  the  Indian  Empire  consists  of  these  heads  of  departments, 
with  the  addition  of  sixteen  members  appointed  by  the  viceroy. 
The  nine  provinces  into  which  India  is  divided  for  administrative 
purposes  are  similarly  ruled  by  governors  and  councils  appointed 
by  the  crown  or  the  viceroy,  although  in  the  governments  of 
municipalities  the  principle  of  election  has  been  introduced. 

2.  Representative  colonies.    These  possess  representative  insti- 
tutions, but  not  responsible  governments,  and  while  the  crown  has 
only  a  veto  on  legislation,  the  home  government  retains  control 
over  public  officers.    In  all  these  colonies  the  executive  officials  are 
appointed,  but  election  is  partially  permitted,  the  legislatures  con- 
sisting sometimes  of  a  single  House,  partly  elected  and  partly  ap- 
pointed ;  sometimes  of  two  houses,  one  being  elected.    The  general 
principle  thus  gives  legislation  largely  into  the  hands  of  the  colo- 
nists, but  leaves  administration  to  officials  appointed  and  controlled 
by  the  home  government.    Even  in  legislation  the  governor's  veto 
is  frequently  used.    To  this  class  belong  Jamaica,  the  Bahamas, 
Bermuda,  British  Guiana,  and  others. 

3.  Responsible  colonies.    These  possess  representative  institu- 
tions and  responsible  governments.    The  crown  has  only  a  veto  on 
legislation,  and  the  home  government  has  no  control  over  any  pub- 
lic officers  except  the  governor.    Executive  councilors  are  appointed 
by  the  governor  without  the  necessity  of  concurrence  by  the  home 
government,  and  the  administrative  departments  are  directed  by 
persons  who  command  the  confidence  of  a  representative  legis- 
lature.   The  government  of  such  colonies,  resting  on  parliamentary 
statutes,  which  form  colonial  constitutions,  is  an  imitation  of  the 
responsible  parliamentary  government  of  the  home  state,  the  real 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  365 

executive  being  the  colonial  prime  minister  and  cabinet,  whose 
tenures  depend  upon  maintaining  a  majority  in  the  lower  house  of 
the  colonial  legislature.  Except  for  the  appointment  of  the  gov- 
ernor, the  right  to  disallow  colonial  statutes,  the  reservation  of 
final  judicial  appeal  to  the  judicial  committee  of  the  Privy  Council, 
and,  of  course,  the  final  right  of  Parliament  to  modify  existing 
arrangements  if  it  so  desires,  complete  self-government  is  permit- 
ted. The  governor's  veto  is  used  only  when  foreign  affairs  of  the 
Empire  are  affected,  or  when  colonial  statutes  are  inconsistent  with 
existing  imperial  legislation.  Suffrage  rests  on  a  broad  basis,  and 
colonial  law,  defense,  and  finance  are  left  in  colonial  hands. 
Even  protective  tariffs  have  been  established  by  all  the  self-govern- 
ing colonies,  though  English  goods  are  admitted  at  preferential 
rates ;  and  in  negotiating  treaties  affecting  these  colonies,  Parlia- 
ment considers  the  wishes  of  the  colony  concerned.  This  class  of 
colony  includes  Newfoundland,  New  Zealand,  and  the  common- 
wealths of  Australia,  Canada,  and  South  Africa. 

To  the  foregoing  classification  two  objections  may  be  urged.  In 
the  first  place,  it  makes  no  provision  for  the  spheres  of  influence, 
protectorates,  and  areas  governed  by  chartered  companies,  that 
really  form  part  of  the  British  Empire.  In  the  second  place,  it  is 
difficult  to  draw  a  line  with  any  degree  of  distinctness  between 
crown  colonies  and  representative  colonies.  Accordingly  many 
writers  prefer  a  twofold  classification  into  colonies  under  direct 
administration  and  colonies  possessing  self-government.  Such 
distinction  rests  not  only  on  a  difference  in  institutions,  but  also 
on  physical,  especially  climatic  and  racial,  conditions  :  the  former 
including  tropical  areas  inhabited  mainly  by  natives ;  the  latter, 
temperate  areas  inhabited  mainly  by  whites. 

In  contrast  to  the  original  British  colonial  policy  that  considered 
only  the  welfare  of  the  home  state,  and  to  that  later  theory  that 
looked  forward  to  the  ultimate  independence  of  the  colonies,  a  new 
attitude  toward  her  more  important  possessions  has  recently  arisen 
in  England.  The  growing  importance  of  self-governing  colonies, 
whose  population  and  resources  rival  those  of  England  itself,  raises 
important  questions  concerning  their  political  future.  Many  ties 
create  a  feeling  of  union  within  the  British  Empire.  Among  these 


366          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

are  investment  of  British  capital  in  the  colonies ;  reciprocity  in 
industrial  interests,  since  colonial  raw  materials  are  exchanged 
for  England's  manufactured  goods  ;  security  from  outside  attack ; 
community  of  language,  literature,  traditions,  and  general  culture ; 
and  the  natural  pride  in  belonging  to  a  powerful  empire.  Geo- 
graphic situation  prevents  complete  amalgamation,  but  the  subor- 
dination of  imperial  interests  to  the  local  Parliament  of  the  British 
Isles  will  scarcely  remain  permanent.  The  Australian  and  Cana- 
dian provinces  have  already  accomplished  federal  union,  and  the 
South  African  colonies  are  just  taking  (1910)  a  similar  step.  In 
these  circumstances  a  movement  for  imperial  federation  has  found 
support  both  in  England  and  in  the  colonies. 

This  plan  became  a  political  movement  with  the  establishment 
of  the  Imperial  Federation  League  in  1884.  Numerous  schemes 
have  been  proposed.  Some  would  create  an  imperial  parliament  of 
delegates  from  the  leading  colonies  and  reduce  the  present  British 
Parliament  to  a  mere  local  body.  Others  would  admit  colonial 
representatives  to  the  existing  Parliament  or  create  an  additional 
federal  council.  At  present  commercial  federation  attracts  more 
interest  than  plans  of  federal  political  organization.  An  imperial 
tariff  against  other  states,  with  free  trade  within  the  Empire,  or  at 
least  preferential  rates  among  its  various  members,  is  seriously  con- 
sidered. General  satisfaction  with  present  conditions,  conflicting 
economic  interests  among  different  parts  of  the  Empire,  and  Brit- 
ish political  conservatism  will  probably  prevent  any  immediate  or 
radical  readjustment. 

135.  Colonial  policy  of  the  United  States.  The  territorial  expan- 
sion of  the  United  States  falls  naturally  into  three  periods : l 

1.  From  1783  to  1853.    During  these  years  the  United  States 
was  gradually  filling  out  its  natural  boundaries.    Territory  acquired 
was  contiguous,  and  was  settled,  in  the  main,  by  people  holding 
political  ideals  similar  to  those  in  the  older  territory. 

2.  From  1853  to  1898.    Except  for  Alaska  and  a  few  small 
islands,  all  of  which  were  considered  of  little  value,  no  territorial 
growth  took  place.    Energy  was  devoted  to  the  development  of  the 
great  domain  previously  secured. 

1  Willoughby,  Territories  and  Dependencies  of  the  United  States,  pp.  5-8. 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  367 

3.  Since  1898.  By  the  acquisition  of  remote  and  scattered  pos- 
sessions, inhabited  by  peoples  in  various  stages  of  civilization,  the 
United  States  has  begun  a  new  type  of  expansion,  involving  new 
problems  and  necessitating  new  methods  of  government. 

Accordingly  the  colonial  policy  of  the  United  States  may  be 
divided  into  that  prevailing  before  1898  and  that  which  has  since 
been  developed,  although  a  remarkable  unity  of  purpose  runs  through 
both  periods.  For  instance,  the  United  States  has  never  held  that 
colonies  existed  for  the  benefit  of  the  homeland.  On  the  contrary, 
each  dependent  territory  has  been  administered  with  a  view  to  its 
own  advancement,  even  at  considerable  outlay  on  the  part  of  the 
United  States.  In  addition,  self-government,  in  so  far  as  the  con- 
dition and  character  of  its  inhabitants  made  it  possible,  has  been 
granted  to  each  dependent  territory.  This  has  been  accompanied 
by  efforts  to  educate  the  population  in  political  principles  and 
methods,  and  additional  political  rights  have  been  extended  as 
soon  as  conditions  warranted  such  action. 

In  spite  of  these  general  features  several  fundamental  differ- 
ences characterize  present,  as  compared  with  earlier,  principles. 
The  Northwest  Ordinance  of  1787,  applying  to  the  area  lying 
north  of  the  Ohio  and  east  of  the  Mississippi,  outlined  the  gen- 
eral policy  that  Congress,  with  few  changes,  repeated  as  each 
additional  territory  required  some  form  of  organization.  While 
Congress  took  the  position  that  it  had  full  authority,  and  that  all 
rights  enumerated  were  the  result  of  its  legislative  action,  it  did 
extend  the  full  rights  and  privileges  of  American  civil  liberty  to 
inhabitants  of  the  territory.  It  also  provided  two  schemes  of  gov- 
ernment. Appointed  officials  were  to  govern  temporarily ;  but  a 
representative  legislature  was  to  be  added  as  soon  as  the  popula- 
tion reached  a  certain  point,  and  territorial  delegates,  with  the 
right  to  debate  but. not  vote,  were  to  be  sent  to  Congress.  The 
act  further  provided  that  the  territory  should  in  time  be  divided 
into  districts,  which  should  be'  admitted  into  the  Union  on  equal 
terms  with  the  original  commonwealths.  These  general  provisions 
—  full  share  in  civil  liberty,  temporary  government  by  appointed 
officials  with  speedy  share  in  self-government,  qualified  represen- 
tation in  Congress,  and  ultimate  incorporation  into  the  Union  — 


368          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

were  applied  to  later  acquisitions,  and  still  form  the  basis  of  the 
government  of  our  organized  territories. 

Since  the  Spanish  War  the  United  States  has  been  compelled 
to  modify  somewhat  its  former  policy.  Peoples  of  a  low  order  of 
civilization,  sometimes  in  revolt  against  organized  authority,  are 
not  in  a  position  to  receive  full  civil  liberty  or  to  share  extensively 
in  government.  Neither  do  territories  of  this  nature  offer  imme- 
diate possibility  of  admission  into  statehood.  The  best  interests  of 
both  colony  and  homeland  may  even  demand  the  establishment  of 
tariff  barriers  or  restrictions  on  free  movement  of  population.  Con- 
sequently the  United  States  has  been  compelled  to  divide  its  terri- 
tory into  "two  classes  having  a  different  political  status;  the  one 
constituting  the  United  States  proper  and  enjoying  full  political 
rights  and  privileges,  and  the  other  dependent  territory  in  subor- 
dination to  the  former,  and  having  its  form  of  government  and  the 
rights  of  its  inhabitants  determined  for  it."  l 

The  present  government  of  the  possessions  of  the  United  States 
may  be  summarized  as  follows : 

1 .  The  District  of  Columbia.    Congress  is  given  by  the  Consti- 
tution the  right  "  to  exercise  exclusive  legislation  "  over  the  area 
that  should  "  become  the  seat  of  the  government  of  the  United 
States."   After  trying  various  types  of  government,  —  commissions, 
mayor  and  councils  as  in  cities,  governor  and  assembly  as  in  terri- 
tories,—  the  present  form,  established  temporarily  in  1874,  was 
made  permanent  in  1878.    All  legislative  powers  are  retained  by 
Congress,  although  it  delegates  large  powers  to  the  three  commis- 
sioners who  form  the  heads  of  administration.    Of  these  two  are 
appointed  from  civil  life  by  the  president,  and  one  is  detailed  from 
the  engineering  corps  of  the  army.    The  District  also  has  its  own 
series  of  courts.    The  population  of  the  District  is  completely  dis- 
franchised and  has  no  representative  in  Congress.     About  half  the 
expenses  of  government  is  borne  by  the  national  government  and 
half  by  the  taxpayers  of  the  District.    As  compared  with  previous 
conditions,  the  present  system  has  been  remarkably  successful. 

2.  The  territories.    With  the  admission  of  Arizona  and  New 
Mexico  to  statehood  in   1912,  the  type  of  government  through 

1  Willoughby,  Territories  and  Dependencies  of  the  United  States,  p.  7. 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  369 

which  most  of  the  commonwealths  have  passed  practically  disap- 
peared. Hawaii  and  Alaska  alone  retain  the  territorial  form. 

Alaska,  secured  from  Russia  by  purchase  in  1867,  remained 
under  direct  government  from  Washington  until  1912,  when  Con- 
gress provided  for  an  Alaskan  senate  and  house  of  representatives, 
both  elected  by  popular  vote.  The  executive  authority  is  vested  in 
a  gQvernor  appointed  by  the  president  and  Senate  of  the  United 
States.  The  Hawaiian  Islands  were  annexed  to  the  United  States 
by  a  joint  resolution  of  Congress  in  1898,  and  the  organic  act 
creating  their  government  was  passed  in  1900.  The  Constitution 
and  laws  of  the  United  States  were  extended  to  Hawaii,  and 
American  citizenship  was  conferred  upon  all  persons  who  were 
citizens  of  the  Hawaiian  Republic  in  1898.  The  governor  and 
secretary  of  the  territory  are  appointed  by  the  president  and  Senate 
of  the  United  States  ;  the  legislature  consists  of  a  popularly  elected 
senate  and  house  of  representatives. 

The  people  of  each  territory,  while  having  no  vote  in  national 
elections,  are  represented  in  Congress  by  a  delegate  to  the  House 
of  Representatives,  who  may  take  part  in  debate  but  may  not  vote. 

3.  Samoa,  Guam,  and  the  Panama  Canal  strip.    Most  of  the 
small  insular  possessions  of  the  United   States,   such  as  Wake 
Island,  Midway  Island,  Howland  and  Baker  islands,  are  practically 
uninhabited,  and  no  provision  for  government  is  necessary.    Samoa 
and  Guam  are  governed  by  the  naval  commandants  in  charge  of  the 
naval  stations,  the  natives  in  most  respects  being  left  free  to  observe 
their  own  customs.    The  Panama  Canal  zone  is  governed  tempo- 
rarily, under  the  direction  of  the  War  Department,  by  a  commission 
of  seven  men  appointed  by  the  president.    To  them  authority  to 
establish  a  civil  service  and  to  legislate,  subject  to  the  approval  of 
the  Secretary  of  War,  on  all  subjects  not  inconsistent  with  the  laws 
and  treaties  of  the  United  States,  has  been  granted. 

4.  Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines.    Both  these  dependencies, 
acquired  by  cession  from  Spain  (1898),  were  at  first  under  mili- 
tary rule.  The  Organic  Act,  establishing  civil  government  for  Porto 
Rico,  was  passed  by  Congress  in  1900.    As  modified  by  several 
later  amendments,  it  created  the  existing  government  of  a  legis- 
lature consisting  of  a  lower  house  of  thirty-five  members  elected  by 


370         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  qualified  voters  of  the  island,  and  an  upper  house  and  gov- 
ernor appointed  by  the  president  of  the  United  States.  The  upper 
house  of  eleven  members,  of  which  at  least  five  must  be  Porto 
Ricans,  also  acts  as  an  executive  council,  and  six  of  its  members 
form  the  heads  of  the  executive -departments.  The  higher  judges 
are  appointed  by  the  president,  the  lower  by  the  insular  governor 
and  council.  A  representative  from  Porto  Rico  is  sent  to  Wash- 
ington with  the  same  privileges  as  a  delegate  from  the  territories, 
and  an  extensive  system  of  local  government  has  been  created  by 
the  insular  authorities.  Except  for  a  temporary  tariff  during  the 
period  of  military  rule,  Porto  Rico  has  enjoyed  free  trade  with  the 
United  States  and  the  same  tariffs  with  foreign  states  as  those 
established  by  the  United  States.  All  customs  duties,  after  the  cost 
of  collection  by  United  States  officials  is  deducted,  are  expended 
for  the  benefit  of  the  island.  Internal  taxes  and  excises  are  levied 
by  the  insular  government,  and  a  limited  borrowing  power  may 
also  be  exercised. 

After  the  report  of  a  special  commission  appointed  (1899)  to 
investigate  conditions  in  the  Philippines,  the  president,  acting 
under  his  authority  as  military  commander  in  chief,  appointed  a 
commission,  consisting  of  a  president  and  four  members,  to  replace 
the  military  government  of  the  islands.  In  1901  an  act  of  Con- 
gress shifted  this  government  from  a  military  to  a  civil  basis,  three 
natives  were  added  to  the  commission,  the  president  of  the  com- 
mission was  made  the  civil  governor,  a  vice  governor  was  created, 
and  provision  was  made  for  the  establishment  of  four  executive 
departments  to  be  presided  over  by  the  four  American  commis- 
sioners. A  system  of  provincial  and  municipal  government,  adapted 
to  the  needs  and  civilization  of  the  various  provinces,  was  drawn 
up  by  the  insular  government  and  a  special  system  of  tariff  and 
of  currency  was  established  by  Congress.  In  1902  Congress  finally 
passed  the  Organic  Act  for  the  government  of  the  Philippines. 
While  retaining  temporarily  the  existing  government,  it  provided 
that  two  years  after  the  pacification  of  the  islands  and  the  comple- 
tion of  a  census,  the  following  government  should  go  into  effect. 
The  present  governor,  vice  governor,  and  commission,  appointed 
by  the  president  and  Senate  of  the  United  States,  remain  in  charge 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT  37! 

of  administration;  but  for  legislation  a  lower  house  of  natives, 
elected  by  the  qualified  voters  of  the  islands,  is  added  to  the  com- 
mission which  forms  the  upper  house.  Judges  are  chosen  as  in 
Porto  Rico,  and  two  delegates,  acting  somewhat  as  ambassadors, 
represent  the  Philippines  in  Washington.  In  1905  the  census 
was  completed,  in  1907  elections  for  a  native  legislature  were  held, 
and  in  1908  the  above  organization  went  into  effect.  Thus  far  its 
actions  have  been  in  the  main  conservative  and  successful. 

136.  Forms  of  colonial  government.  A  brief  summary  of  the 
leading  types  of  colonial  government  may  now  be  made.  While 
one  form  shades  gradually  into  another,  and  wide  variations  are 
found  within  each  group,  a  rough  classification  follows : 1 

1 .  Spheres  of  influence.    During  the  past  quarter  of  a  century 
states,  in  their  eagerness  to  secure  colonial  possessions,  have  not 
been  satisfied  with  gradual  occupation  of  new  lands  by  colonists 
or  capitalists.    States  themselves,  even  before  they  were  ready  to 
occupy  or  to  govern,  have  outlined  certain  areas  for  future  activity. 
This  process  naturally  led  to  disputes  and  necessitated  mutual 
understandings  and  treaties.    By  the   Berlin   Conference  (1885) 
and  the  Brussels  Conference  (1890)  international  rules  concerning 
spheres  of  influence  were  laid  down,  and  they  may  accordingly  be 
defined  as  "  tracts  of  territory  within  which  a  state,  on  the  basis 
of  treaties  with  neighboring  colonial  powers,  enjoys  the  exclusive 
privilege  of  exercising  political  influence,  of  concluding  treaties  of 
protectorate,  of  obtaining  industrial  concessions,  and  of  eventually 
bringing  the  region  under  its  direct  political  control."  2   This  doc- 
trine has  found  its  most  important  application   in  the  partition 
of  Africa,  in  Siam,  and,  in  a  modified  form,  in  the  opening  up 
of  China. 

2.  Colonial  protectorates.  The  favorite  method  by  which  depend- 
encies pass  from  the  negative  control  of  the  sphere  of  influence 
to  the  direct  authority  of  colonial  government  is  by  the  establish- 
ment of  a  colonial  protectorate.    This  form  of  government,  modeled 
upon  the  international  concept  of  protectorates  between  stronger 
and   weaker   states,    takes   various   forms  and  may  be  intended 
as  a  transitional  step  toward  direct  administration,  or,  because  of 

1  Reinsch,  Colonial  Government,  Part  II.  2  Ibid.,  p.  103. 


372          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

its  advantages,  as  a  permanent  means  of  control.  Its  essential 
features  include  noninterference  with  local  customs,  institutions, 
and  laws  unless  absolutely  necessary ;  control  by  the  protecting 
state  of  all  foreign  relations  of  the  colony ;  and  the  presence  in 
the  colony  of  representatives  of  the  protecting  state,  who  exercise 
an  influence  on  internal  administration.  International  law  holds 
the  protecting  power  responsible  for  the  acts  of  such  territories, 
considering  them  as  parts  of  its  dominions,  but  in  municipal  law 
colonial  protectorates  are  not  considered  subject  to  the  direct  legis- 
lative authority  that  a  state  exercises  over  its  own  territory.  In 
dealing  with  uncivilized  peoples  a  protectorate  is  usually  temporary, 
although  nominal  protectorates  exist  in  many  parts  of  Africa  that 
have  actually  been  brought  under  more  direct  control.  When  an 
advanced  but  dissimilar  type  of  civilization  must  be  dealt  with, 
the  protectorate  has  obvious  advantages.  Tunis  and  parts  of 
Indo-China  are  controlled  by  France  in  this  fashion ;  England 
in  India  and  the  Dutch  in  Guiana  have  adopted  modified  protec- 
torates as  convenient  forms  of  administration  ;  and  Egypt  is  prac- 
tically a  British  protectorate,  whatever  may  be  its  legal  position  in 
international  law. 

3.  Chartered  companies.  Colonial  commercial  companies  pre- 
pared the  way  for  direct  political  control  during  the  seventeenth 
century,  and  recurring  competition  for  the  rich  trade  of  unappro- 
priated regions  has,  during  the  past  quarter  of  a  century,  given  rise 
to  similar  organizations,  with  similar  political  results.  The  British 
North  Borneo  Company  (1889)  is  probably  the  most  powerful, 
financially  and  politically  ;  the  International  Kongo  Association 
(1879)  created  an  independent  state  ;  and  other  companies,  British, 
German,  and  Portuguese,  have  shared  in  the  partition  of  Africa. 
As  distinguished  from  earlier  companies,  those  recently  established 
enjoy  larger  political  powers,  practically  controlling  internal  admin- 
istration in  the  areas  over  which  their  rights  extend.  As  a  conse- 
quence they  are  subject  to  a  stricter  control  on  the  part  of  the  home 
government,  making  the  transition  from  a  sphere  of  influence  to 
colonial  dominion  natural  and  easy.  Besides,  modern  companies 
do  not  possess  a  monopoly  of  commerce,  their  attention  being 
directed  rather  to  the  industrial  exploitation  of  natural  resources 


COLONIAL  GOVERNMENT 

than  to  trade.  The  rapidity  and  economy  with  which  such  com- 
panies have  extended  their  sway  is  remarkable.  Two  thirds  of  the 
recent  territorial  expansion  of  Great  Britain  in  Africa  followed  the 
activities  of  private  chartered  companies  that  received  no  subven- 
tions from  the  government.  They  did  receive,  however,  valuable 
territorial  and  mining  concessions,  and  these  grants  to  private 
individuals  and  corporations  may  ultimately  retard  settlement  and 
progress. 

4.  Direct  administration.    In  most  colonies  proper  the  govern- 
ment of  the  home  state  has  entire  control  of  legislation,  and  ad- 
ministration is  carried  on  by  public  officers  under  home  control. 
Colonial  organization  consists  of  a  governor,  usually  assisted  by 
councils  that  are  appointive  or  partly  or  wholly  elective.    Such 
councils  have,  however,  little   legislative    power,  their  functions 
being  mainly  advisory,  although  in  some  cases,  for  example  the 
Council  of  the  Dutch  Indies,  they  exercise  considerable  power  and 
influence.    Of  such  nature  is  the  government   of  most  French, 
German,  and  Dutch  dependencies  and  of  the  greater  number  of 
England's  possessions.    Most  of  them  are  tropical  colonies  where 
white  settlers  are  few  in  number  and  where  self-government  is 
considered  undesirable. 

5.  Self-government.    A  few  colonies  possess  representative  in- 
stitutions and  responsible    government.    The  home    government 
retains  only  a  veto  on  legislation,  has  no  control  over  any  colonial 
official  except  the  governor,  and  seldom  interferes  in  the  internal 
affairs  of   the  colony.    Administration    is   controlled   by  persons 
having  the  confidence  of  a  representative  legislature,  and  even  the 
veto  power  of  the  governor,  acting  as  the  representative  of  the 
interests  of  the  Empire,  is  seldom  used.    The  leading  self-govern- 
ing colonies  are  the  commonwealths  of  Australasia,  Canada,  and 
South  Africa.    These  have  successfully  imitated  the  British  type 
of  government  and  have  developed  an  almost  independent  political 
life.    Their  relation  to  the  mother  country  resembles  federation 
rather  than  subjection;  in  fact  such  colonies  are  often  compared 
to  international  protectorates,  since,  in  both,  foreign  relations  are 
controlled  by  the  paramount  state,  but  autonomy  exercised  in  local 
affairs.    The  process  of  federation,  already  carried  out  in  these 


374          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

colonies  and  strongly  urged  by  some  for  the  entire  British  Empire, 
is  a  logical  result  of  colonial  self-government  when  common 
interests  prevent  entire  independence. 

In  the  organs  of  colonial  administration  located  in  the  mother 
country  considerable  variation  is  found  in  modern  states.  Gener- 
ally the  home  organization  is  simple  if  colonies  are  allowed  exten- 
sive powers  of  self-government,  and  elaborate  if  colonial  affairs  are 
closely  supervised  by  the  home  state.  France  has  an  intricate  cen- 
tral colonial  administration,  under  a  separate  ministry  of  colonies. 
Administration  of  colonial  affairs  in  England  is  divided  among  the 
Colonial  Office,  which  controls  the  colonies  proper ;  the  secretary 
of  state  for  India,  who  directs  Indian  affairs ;  and  the  Foreign 
Office,  which  administers  the  protectorates.  In  the  United  States, 
Congress  has  final  authority,  but  it  has  delegated  powers  to  vari- 
ous branches  of  the  government.  As  yet  no  separate  department 
of  colonial  affairs  has  been  organized. 


PART  III 
THE   ENDS   OF  THE   STATE 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XXIV 

REFERENCES 

THE  AIMS  OF  THE  STATE 

1.  AS  AN  END 

2.  AS  A  MEANS 

3.  AS  BOTH  END  AND  MEANS 

THE  ACTIVITIES  OF  THE  STATE 

1.  ANARCHISTIC 

2.  INDIVIDUALISTIC 

3.  GENERAL  WELFARE 

4.  SOCIALISTIC 

INDIVIDUALISM 

1.  AS  AN  ETHICAL  CONCEPT 

2.  AS  AN  ECONOMIC  CONCEPT 

3-    AS  A  SCIENTIFIC  CONCEPT 

SOCIALISM 

1.  NATURE  OF  THE  THEORY 

2.  ADVANTAGES  CLAIMED  FOR  THE  THEORY 

3.  CRITICISM  OF  THE  THEORY 

I 

SOCIALISM  IN  PRESENT  POLITICS 

1.  IN  GERMANY 

2.  IN  FRANCE 

3.  IN  OTHER  CONTINENTAL  STATES 

4.  IN  ENGLAND 

5.  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

6.  THE  "  INTERNATIONAL  " 


376 


CHAPTER  XXIV 

THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT 

REFERENCES 

BLUNTSCHLI,  J.  K.  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  V 

BOSANQUET,  B.  The  Philosophical  Theory  of  the  State,  chap,  viii 

BURGESS,  J.  W.  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  83-89 

ELY,  R.  T.  French  and  German  Socialism 

ELY,  R.  T.  Socialism  and  Social  Reform 

HILLQUIT,  M.  History  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States 

HILLQUIT,  M.   Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice 

KELLY,  E.  Government,  or  Human  Evolution 

KIRKUP,  T.  History  of  Socialism 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  357-385 

M'KECHNIE,  W.  S.  The  State  and  the  Individual,  Part  II,  ch;  ps.  xiv-xvii 

MERRIAM,  C.  E.  American  Political  Theories,  chap,  iv 

MILL,  J.  Si  Principles  of  Political  Economy,  Book  V,  chap,  xi 

RAE,  J.  Contemporary  Socialism 

RITCHIE,  D.  G.  Studies  in  Political  and  Social  Ethics,  chap,  iii 

SCHAFFLE,  A.  E.  F.  The  Quintessence  of  Socialism 

SIDGWICK,  H.  Elements  of  Politics,  chaps,  iii-xiii 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  pp.  309-343 

WILSON,  W.  The  State,  chap,  xvi 

WOOLSEY,  T.  D.  Political  Science,  Vol.  I,  Part  II,  chap,  iv 

ZENKER,  E.  V.  Anarchism 

137.  The  aims  of  the  state.  Whether  the  state  is  an  end  in 
itself  or  whether  it  is  merely  a  means  enabling  individuals  to  attain 
their  ends  has  been  a  much-disputed  question.1  The  ancients  re- 
garded the  state  as  the  highest  aim  of  human  life  and  as  an  end 
in  itself.  Accordingly  they  subordinated  the  individual  and  often 
sacrificed  personal  freedom  and  the  promotion  of  general  welfare. 
On  the  other  hand,  a  large  school  of  writers,  especially  in  England 
and  America,  have  regarded  the  state  as  a  mere  institution,  arti- 
ficially designed  to  promote  the  welfare  of  the  greatest  number  of 
individuals.  From  this  standpoint  it  is  difficult  to  justify  the  heavy 
burdens  that  states  lay  upon  their  citizens  for  the  benefit  of  posterity, 
or  the  obligations  that  they  feel  for  their  poor  or  helpless.  Besides, 

1  Bluntschli,  The  Theory  of  the  State,  Bk.  V. 
A  377 


378         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

the  sacrifice  of  property  and  of  life  that  individuals  make  when 
the  safety  of  the  state  is  threatened  would  be  useless  if  individual 
welfare  were  the  only  end. 

Both  of  these  views,  then,  are  somewhat  one-sided.  From  the1 
standpoint  of  the  individual  the  state  is  a  means  through  which 
the  highest  development  of  humanity  is  aimed  at.  At  the  same 
time  the  state,  considered  apart  from  the  individuals  that  compose 
it,  or  viewing  them  only  as  they  are  members  of  the  body  politic, 
is  an  end  in  itself.  Usually  the  welfare  of  the  state  and  that  of  its 
individuals  coincide,  but  sometimes  they  diverge  somewhat  and 
occasionally  they  may  be  altogether  opposed.  The  purpose  of  the 
state,  considered  as  an  end  in  itself  as  well  as  a  means  for  the 
attainment  of  individual  ends,  is  not  stated  alike  by  all  writers  on 
political  science,  although  a  general  similarity  of  conception  may 
be  observed.  Bluntschli  formulates  the  proper  end  of  the  state 
as  "the  development  of  the  national  capacities,  the  perfecting  of 
the  national  life,  and  finally  its  completion,  pfovided,  of  course, 
that  the  process  of  moral'  and  political  development  shall  not 
be  opposed  to  the  destiny  of  humanity."  l  The  state  has  thus 
the  double  function  of  maintaining  the  national  powers  and  of 
developing  them. 

Von  Holtzendorff  holds  that  the  state  has  a  triple  end.2  The 
first  is  power,  by  which  the  state  may  preserve  its  existence  and 
position  against  other  states,  and  its  authority  over  all  individuals 
and  associations  of  individuals  within  itself.  The  second  is  individ- 
ual liberty,  or  that  sphere  of  freedom  which  the  state  marks  out 
for  the  individual  and  protects  against  encroachment  on  the  part 
of  government  and  individual.  The  third  is  general  welfare,  which 
the  state  must  secure  by  maintaining  peace  and  order  and  by 
aiding  and  educating  its  subjects. 

Burgess  3  separates  the  proximate  from  the  ultimate  ends  of  the 
state,  arranging  them  as  primary,  secondary,  and  ultimate  purposes, 
each  end  becoming  in  turn  a  means  for  the  accomplishment  of 
the  succeeding  end.  On  this  basis  the  first,  or  proximate,  end  of 
the  state  is  government  and  liberty.  The  state  must  maintain 

1  The  Theory  of  the  State,  p.  320.  2  Principien  der  Politik,  pp.  219  ff. 

8  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  85-89. 


THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT  379 

peace  and  law,  even  if  in  doing  so  it  crushes  both  individual  free- 
dom and  national  genius.  However,  as  soon  as  the  disposition  to 
obey  law  and  observe  order  is  established,  the  state  must  mark 
off  a  sphere  of  individual  liberty,  and  must,  from  time  to  time, 
readjust  the  relation  of  government  to  liberty,  widening  the  latter 
as  civilization  advances.  The  secondary  aim,  growing  out  of  the 
first,  is  the  perfecting  of  nationality,  —  the  development  of  the 
popular  genius.  For  this  purpose  national  states,  resting  on  nat- 
ural physical  and  ethnic  foundations,  are  the  best  instruments. 
The  final  aim  is  the  perfecting  of  humanity,  —  the  civilization  of 
the  world.  In  a  universal  world-state  human  reason,  perfectly 
developed,  would  attain  to  universal  command.  The  ends  of  the 
state,  in  historical  order,  would  thus  be  "  first,  the  organization  of 
government  and  of  liberty,  so  as  to  give  the  highest  possible  power 
to  the  government  consistent  with  the  highest  possible  freedom  to 
the  individual ;  to  the  end,  secondly,  that  the  national  genius  of  the 
different  states  may  be  developed  and  perfected  and  made  objective 
in  customs,  laws,  and  institutions ;  from  the  standpoints  furnished 
by  which,  finally,  the  world's  civilization  may  be  surveyed  upon  all 
sides,  mapped  out,  traversed,  made  known,  and  realized." 

138.  The  activities  of  the  state.  Whatever  may  be  the  philo- 
sophic basis  upon  which  the  state  rests  or  the  ultimate  ends  of  its 
existence,  the  question  at  present  of  paramount  importance  con- 
cerns the  proper  sphere  of  its  operation.  This  includes  the  nature 
of  the  functions  for 'whose  performance  the  state  is  essentially 
fitted ;  and  the  aims  which,  under  given  conditions  of  civilization, 
are  desirable  and  practicably  attainable.  Obviously,  changing  social 
conditions  and  tendencies  cause  corresponding  changes  in  ideas 
concerning  the  proper  scope  of  state  activities.  The  functions  of 
the  state  in  the  agricultural  regime  of  feudalism  were  quite  different 
from  those  demanded  by  modern  industrial  conditions.  Besides, 
the  growth  of  political  consciousness  and  the  widening  of  de- 
mocracy have  created  new  concepts  as  to  the  desirability  of  state 
action  and  the  possibility  of  social  reform.  Governmental  activity, 
opposed  by  popular  opinion  when  the  majority  of  the  people  have 
no  voice  in  government,  may  be  enthusiastically  favored  when  the 
government  is  under  popular  control.  . 


380          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

But,  however  the  methods  of  state  functioning  or  the  objects  of 
governmental  regulation  may  differ  from  time  to  time,  the  question 
in  last  analysis  reduces  itself  to  a  statement  of  the  proper  relation 
of  state  to  individual.  Every  exercise  of  power  by  the  state  is  a 
corresponding  limitation  on  the  freedom  of  its  citizens,  and  the 
proper  scope  of  state  activities  can  be  secured  only  by  a  careful 
balancing  of  social  and  individual  interests.  This  adjustment  has 
always  been  the  fundamental  political  problem,  and  the  leading 
views  as  to  its  proper  solution  may  be  roughly  classified  as  : 1 

1.  Anarchistic.   This  view,  the  logical  extreme  of  individualism, 
considers  government   an  unnecessary  evil.    It  would  abolish  the 
collective  authority  of  the  state,  replacing  it  by  individual  freedom 
modified  only  by  voluntarily  set  limits.    It  would  expect  voluntary 
associations  to   secure  general   improvements,   protect  lives  and 
property,  and  coerce  individuals  that  are  dangerous  to  justice  and 
order.    The  difficulties  inherent  in  such  a  system  —  the  lack  of 
liberty  on  the  part  of  those  coerced,  and  the  need  for  some  authority 
to  determine  for  what  purposes  and  to  what  extent  these  voluntary 
associations  should  act — are  evident.    Because  of  the  illogical  basis 
on  which  the  anarchistic  theory  rests,  and  because  of  the  small 
part  it  plays  in'  the  beliefs  and  actions  of  most  persons,  it  needs 
no  further  discussion. 

2.  Individualistic.    This   theory  considers    the    state   an  evil, 
necessary  only  because  of  the  imperfections  of  mankind.    Its  sole 
duty  is  to  protect  the  life,  liberty,  and  property  of  individuals  from 
violence  or  fraud.    The  state  is  therefore  justified  in  interference 
only  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  its  citizens  against  worse  inter- 
ference on  the  part  of  other  citizens,  and  is  not  justified  in  further 
activity,  even  for  purposes  admittedly  beneficial.    This  view  is  fre- 
quently accompanied  by  the  belief  that,  as  the  sense  of'  order  and 
morality  becomes  more  perfect,  the  need  for  state  action  will  di- 
minish, and  that  the  ideal  condition  would  be  that  in  which  the 
state  no  longer  exists  because  no  longer  needed.    Since  this  doc- 
trine until  recently  played  a  large  part  in  political  theory  and,  in  a 
modified  form,  still  underlies  the  political  thinking  of  many  persons, 
it  will  be  further  considered  in  a  following  section.2 

1Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,    pp.  318  ff.  2  See  section  139. 


THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT  381 

3.  General  welfare.    This  view  underlies  the  actual  operation  of 
government  in  modern  states.    It  considers  the  state  as  society 
organized,  and  as  justified  not  only  in  maintaining  its  own  existence 
and  the  life,  liberty,  and  property  of  its  citizens,  but  also  in  under- 
taking such  other  functions  as,  under  existing  conditions,  may  be 
conducive  to   general   welfare.    It   also    recognizes  that  a  most 
important  duty  of  the  state  is  to  create  and  safeguard  a  wide  sphere 
of  individual  liberty  from  governmental  or  private  interference.    It 
thus  rests  on  an  individualistic  basis,  but  is  greatly  modified  by 
utilitarian  and  opportunistic  considerations.    In  actual  operation  it 
may  dictate  policies  of  action  varying  from  the  limited  interfer- 
ence of  individualism  to  the  extreme  interference  of  socialism,  but 
in  the  exercise  of  each  function  its  decision  must  rest  upon  the 
utilitarian  basis  of  the  best  interests  of  the  individual  and  of  society. 
The  actual  functions  that  modern  states  consider  it  essential  and 
desirable  to  perform  will  be  considered  in  a  later  chapter.1 

4.  Socialistic.    This  theory,  or  the  group  of  theories  that  may 
be  classed  under  this   head,  aims  to  substitute  for  the  present 
individualistic  society  a  cooperative  commonwealth,  controlling  all 
the  means  of  production  and  regulating  distribution  according  to 
some  method  of  joint  control.    It  is  an  extension  of  the  general- 
welfare  doctrine  to  cover  many  points  that  present  states  leave  to 
private  initiative,  believing  that  state  action,  if  made  more  extensive, 
can  remedy  the  injustice  and  wastefulness  of  modern  industrial  life. 
Because  its .  principles  contain  certain  essential  truths,  have  influ- 
enced governmental  action  in  a  marked  degree,  and  are  spreading 
in  the  minds  of  many  persons,  socialism,  as  to  its  theoretic  basis  and 
as  a  force  in  present  politics,  will  be  considered  in  later  sections.2 

139.  Individualism.  The  individualist  doctrine,  opposing  gov- 
ernmental action  except  for  the  mere  preservation  of  life,  liberty, 
and  property,  was  particularly  powerful  during  the  latter  half  of  the 
eighteenth  and  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century.  It  assumed 
different  aspects  according  as  it  was  viewed  from  (i)  ethical,  (2) 
economic,  or  (3)  scientific  points  of  view ;  but  from  all  of  them 
arguments  favoring  freedom  of  individual  action  were  drawn.3 

1  See  Chapter  XXV.  2  See  sections  140,  141. 

8Leacock,  Elements  of  Political  Science,  Part  III,  chap.  i. 


382          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

1.  In  the  writings  of  the  political  philosophers  of  the  Natural 
Rights    School    strong   statements    of   the    desirability    of     non- 
interference and  of  the  right  of  individuals  to  be  let  alone  are 
found.    Kant,  Fichte,  and  von  Humboldt  in  Germany,  Rousseau 
in  France,  Hume  and  Locke  in  England,  and  Jefferson,  Madison, 
and  Paine  in  America 1  are  representative  leaders  of  that  belief  in 
individual  freedom  that  accompanied  the  rise  of  popular  sover- 
eignty.   As  stated  by  von  Humboldt,  "  the  aim  of  the  state  should 
be  the  development  of  the  powers  of  all  its  single  citizens  in  their 
perfect  individuality ;  that  it  must  therefore  pursue  no  other  object 
than  that  which  they  cannot  pursue  of  themselves,  viz.,  security."  2 

The  fallacies  inherent  in  the  social-contract  and  natural-rights 
doctrines,  from  which  individualism  was  deduced,  have  been  already 
pointed  out.3  Besides,  individualism,  if  carried  out  logically,  would 
be  an  impossible  ideal  which  no  state  has  yet  been  willing  to  try, 
and  which  would  result  in  the  total  destruction  of  social  control. 
Even  when  state  action  is  limited  to  the  protection  of  life,  liberty, 
and  property,  such  action  necessitates  some  interference  and  must 
rest  on  a  utilitarian  basis ;  and  even  individualists  themselves 
admit  the  desirability  of  governmental  action  in  education,  in  care 
for  the  poor  and  helpless,  and  in  the  maintenance  of  coinage  and 
the  postal  service,  none  of  which  is  strictly  included  under  their 
formula. 

2.  Individualism,  as  an  economic  principle,   is  based  on  the 
grounds  that  free  competition  and  unrestricted  industry  and  com- 
merce are  more  profitable  than  economic  activities  under  govern- 
mental regulation  and  control.    This  laissez-faire  doctrine  arose 
in  England  at  the  time  of  the  Industrial  Revolution,  when  large- 
scale  machine   production  was  replacing  the  restricted  "  domestic 
system,"  and  when  transportation  and  commerce  were  undergoing 
rapid  changes.    As  a  result  the  existing  system  of  government 
regulation  in  England  grew  steadily  out  of  harmony  with  the  new 
conditions  and  with  England's  economic  interests.    In  the  "  Wealth 
of  Nations  "  (1776)  of  Adam  Smith,  followed  by  the  teachings  of 
other  economists  in  England  and  on  the  continent,  it  was  pointed 

1  Merriam,  American  Political  Theories,  chaps,  ii-iv. 

2  Quoted  by  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  323.        8  See  section  42. 


THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT  383 

out  that  if  each  individual  were  left  free  to  pursue  his  own  interests 
the  welfare  of  all  would  be  best  secured ;  that  free  movement  of 
capital  and  labor,  free  adjustment  of  prices  on  the  basis  of  demand 
and  supply,  and  free  movement  of  trade  from  place  to  place  would 
lead  to  the  best  economic  adjustment ;  and  that  governmental  in- 
terference in  industry  prevented  the  proper  working  out  of  natural 
laws.  In  England  these  doctrines  led  to  the  repeal  of  many 
statutes  regulating  labor,  industry,  and  commerce,  and  gave  an 
impetus  during  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  to  the  free- 
trade  movement  in  Europe  and  America.  More  recently  the  evils 
growing  out  of  unrestricted  compietition,  the  obvious  advantages  of 
combination  and  the  need  for  its  regulation,  and  the  possibilities 
of  public  effort  have  led  to  the  assumption  by  the  state  of  certain 
economic  functions  and  to  the  regulation  of  many  others.  The 
present  attitude  of  the  state  toward  industry  will  be  discussed  in 
the  following  chapter.1 

3.  On  a  scientific  basis  individualism  has  been  argued  as  a 
corollary  of  the  biologic  doctrine  of  evolution.  This  is  especially 
the  case  in  the  writings  of  Herbert  Spencer,  who  looked  upon 
governmental  action  as  unwise  interference  with  the  working  out 
of  "  the  survival  of  the  fittest,"  and  who  wished  to  limit  govern- 
ment, as  one  of  the  "  organs  "  of  society,  to  the  performance  of 
its  specific  functions  alone.  Accordingly  Spencer  considered  gov- 
ernment a  necessary  evil,  whose  activities  will  diminish  in  scope  as 
civilization  develops  ;  and  he  further  tried  to  prove  that  all  exten- 
sions of  governmental  action  in  the  past  have  been  followed  by 
injurious  results. 

In  applying  the  biologic  analogy  upholders  of  individualism 
fail  to  consider  the  essential  difference  between  mankind  and  the 
lower  forms  of  life.  While  the  latter  are  at  the  mercy  of  their 
environment  and  are  transformed  by  it,  man  transforms  his  en- 
vironment and  can  thus  remove  the  great  waste  that  the  process 
of  natural  selection  otherwise  necessitates.  Besides,  since  the  sur- 
vival of  the  "  fittest  "  means  only  the  fittest  under  given  circum- 
stances, and  not  necessarily  the  survival  of  the  best,  man,  by 
improving  those  circumstances,  can  make  the  fittest  a  far  more 

1  See  section  144. 


384          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

desirable  product.  Hence  collective  activity,  instead  of  being  an 
interference  with  a  beneficent  law,  may  remove  the  waste  of  com- 
petition, hasten  progress,  and  make  possible  a  higher  type  of 
individual  and  of  society. 

In  conclusion,  the  postulates  of  individualism  may  be  stated  as 
follows  : l 

1 .  That  self-interest  is  a  universal  principle  in  human  nature. 

2.  That,  in  the  long  run,  each  individual  knows  his  own  interests 
best,  and,  in  the  'absence  of  arbitrary  restrictions,  is  sure  to  follow 
them. 

3.  That,  in  the  absence  of  external  restraint,  free  competition 
can  and  does  exist. 

4.  That    such    free    competition  always  develops  the  highest 
human  possibilities,   by  enabling  each   individual  to  do  that  for 
which  he  is  best  fitted,  by  eliminating  unfit  elements,  and  thus 
most  surely  advancing  the  welfare  of  all. 

These  may  be  criticized  in  order : 

1 .  Altruism  as  well  as  self-interest  is  a  motive  in  human  action. 

2.  In  some  cases,  for  instance  in  compulsory  education,  sanita- 
tion, labor  laws,  etc.,  the  persons  concerned  do  not  know  their  own 
interests  and  must  be  protected  by  the  collective  action  of  others. 

3.  Competition    does   not   persist  unless   the   competitors  are 
comparatively  equal   in  strength.    Frequently  governmental  inter- 
ference, by  assisting  the  weaker  party,  makes  competition  possible 
instead  of  destroying  it. 

4.  As  already  indicated,  the  law  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest, 
when  applied  to  human  society,  is  wasteful,  slow,  and  often  in- 
effective.   Collective  activity  may  prevent  its  action  when  undesir- 
able, or  may  bring  it  into  operation  if  some  impeding  cause  has 
interfered. 

The  principle  of  noninterference,  at  present,  is  not  in  favor  as 
a  theory,  nor  does  it  form,  under  modern  conditions,  a  satisfactory 
basis  for  state  functions.  "  Its  adoption,  in  complete  form,  runs 
counter  to  the  most  instinctive  impulses  of  humanity  and  would 
neglect  governmental  duties  of  the  most  evident  character.  As  a 
matter  of  political  justice  it  rests  on  a  mechanical  attempt  to 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  pp.  326  ff. 


THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT  385 

completely  divorce  individual  and  social  rights.  On  an  economic 
basis  it  overlooks  the  plain  advantages  of  cooperation  and  regulated 
effort.  As  a  scientific  law  it  will  not  stand  examination."  l 

140.  Socialism.  Socialism,  the  most  radical  ideal  of  govern- 
mental activity,  would  transfer  to  the  state  control  over  land  and 
the  means  of  production  and  would  limit  private  property  to  con- 
sumption goods  alone.  The  state  would  thus  manage  all  industrial 
enterprises  and  would  replace  private  initiative  and  competition 
by  state  control  through  managers  and  laborers  employed,  paid, 
and  directed  by  governmental  departments. 

Revolutionary  socialists  anticipate  a  general  uprising  of  the 
masses,  who  will  establish  a  socialistic  state  by  overthrowing  or 
securing  control  of  existing  governments  and  confiscating  property 
in  private  hands.  Other  less  radical  socialists  believe  that  this 
revolution  will  take  place  voluntarily,  approved  by  all  because  of 
thes  increasing  evils  of  the  present  system. 
ligent  socialists  look  forwardjg  socialism  as^jjJ 


by  gradually  extending  governmental  functions  and  by  increasing 
public  control  over  great  industrial  combinations. 

Socialists  differ  also  in  the  details  of  their  proposed  organization, 
especially  in  the  method  of  distributing  income  among  the  mem- 
bers of  a  socialistic  state.  Some  believe  that,  under  the  economies 
and  improved  production  of  socialism,  distribution  would  present 
no  difficulties  because  of  the  abundance  of  wealth.  Others  recom- 
mend that  everything  should  be  held  in  common,  each  producing 
according  to  his  capacity  and  receiving  according  to  his  needs. 
Another  group  advocates  equality  of  wages,  sometimes  with  the' 
proviso  that  all  persons  perform  equal  amounts  of  labor,  according 
to  a  system  of  units  of  labor-time,  based  on  the  attractiveness  or 
repulsiveness  of  the  occupation.  The  plan  upheld  by  the  majority  ' 
of  socialists  bases  wages  on  efficiency.  Production,  as  a  depart- 
ment of  government,  would  be  controlled  by  elected  officials,  who 
would  manage  all  industry,  assign  laborers  to  their  duties,  and 
arrange  wages  and  promotions. 

Among  the  advantages  claimed  for  socialism  are  that  it  will 
remedy  the  injustice,   wastefulness,   and  haphazard   methods  of 

i  Leacock,  Elements  of  Political  Science,  p.  369. 


386          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

present  industry,  and  will  replac6  self-interest  as  the  leading 
motive  of  human  action  by  a  bro#d,  altruistic  desire  for  social 
usefulness.  Socialists  claim  that,  under  private  ownership  of.  land 
and  the  increasing  use  of  machinery  and  combination  of  capital, 
the  laborer,  unable  to  apply  himself  directly  to  the  means  of  pro- 
duction, must  make  a  forced  bargain  with  landlord  or  capitalist ; 
that  under  this  system  the  laborer  receives  far  less  than  his 
proper  share  of  the  product,  landlords  and  capitalists  receiving 
enormous  rents  and  profits  ;  and  that  as  population  increases 
and  the  present  system  of  industry  is  further  developed,  the  gulf 
between  capitalists  and  laborers  will  widen,  causing  finally  the 
overthrow  of  the  existing  system  and  the  establishment  of  a 
socialistic  state.1 

In  pointing  out  the  economic  advantages  of  their  system 
socialists  claim  that  "  the  economic  needs  of  the  community  will 
be  accurately  estimated  and  the  available  land,  labor,  and  capital 
/  carefully  apportioned,  so  that  just  the  quantity  of  each  kind  of 
goods  required  will  be  produced.  The  duplication  of  plants  and  the 
excessive  production  of  particular  goods,  now  so  common,  will  be 
avoided,  the  expenses  of  advertising  and  competitive  selling  will  be 
saved,  and,  finally,  the  production  of  goods  that  are  harmful  rather 
than  beneficial  to  those  who  consume  them  will  be  suspended."  2 
As  a  result,  the  saving  in  productive  power  may  be  applied  either 
to  increase  the  amount  of  goods  produced,  or  to  shorten  the  hours 
of  labor,  or  both.  From  a  moral  standpoint  it  is  plain  that  "  instead 
of  depending  upon  self-interest  as  a  spur  to  industrial  activity, 
socialism  relies  upon  the  love  of  activity  for  its  own  sake,  the 
desire  to  contribute  to  the  common  good,  the  sense  of  duty  in  the 
performance  of  tasks  that  are  largely  voluntary,  and  the  ambition 
to  win  social  esteem  and  social  distinction  through  conspicuous 
social  service.3  " 

Without  discussing  the  economic  fallacy  into  which  socialists 
are  led  in  ascribing  an  undue  share  of  production  to  labor  alone,4 
some  of  the  practical  objections  to  the  system  may  be  pointed  out: 

1  See  Karl  Marx,  Capital. 

2  Seager,  Introduction  to  Economics,  p.  525.  8  Ibid.,  p.  525. 

4  For  a  discussion  of  wages  see  Seligman,  Principles  of  Economics,  chap,  xxvi ; 
Seager,  Introduction  to  Economics,  chap,  xiil 


THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT  387 

1 .  The  difficulties  of  administration  would  be  enormous.    Such 
questions  as  the  apportionment  of  laborers  among  the  various 
departments  of  industry,  the  assignment  of  values  to  products  and 
to  labor,  the  quantity  of  goods  to  be  produced,  the  relative  propor- 
tion of  capital  goods  and  consumers'  goods,  and  the  distribution  of 
income,  —  all  of  which  are  now  regulated,  imperfectly  to  be  sure, 
by  the  law  of  demand  and  supply,  —  are  complex  problems  whose 
artificial  adjustment  would    require  administrative  ability  of  the 
highest  order. 

2.  Serious  dangers  would   arise  because  of  the  opportunities 
for  corruption,  intrigue,  and  personal  spite.    Against  the  power  of 
"  bosses,"  in  a  socialistic  state,  there  would  be  little  possibility  of 
resistance  and  little  chance  of  fair  play.    The  connection  at  present 
existing  between  business  and  politics  is  the  source  of  many  evils 
in  government ;  strengthening  that  connection  until  they  become 
practically  identical  would,  under  present  moral  conditions,  scarcely 
tend  toward  improvement. 

3.  It  is  denied  that  socialism  is  favnrahlg  to  progress.    If  the 
incentive  of  competition  and  the  hope  of  reward  were  removed, 
experiments    and    improvements   would    be    retarded,    individual 
initiative  would  be  checked,  and,  in  attempting  to  remove  inequal- 
ities, there  would  be  danger  of  reducing  life  to  the  dull'  uniformity 
of  stagnation. 

4.  Socialists  are  inclined  to  be  too  optimistic  in  underrating  the 
psychological  obstacles  to  their  plan.    The  average  man  is  neither 
so  inclined  to  work  nor  so  zealous  for  common  welfare  as  socialism 
demands.    Neither  is  the  sense  of  duty  sufficiently  developed,  nor 
public  opinion,  on  which  social  esteem  must  depend,  sufficiently 
discriminating  to  obviate  the  necessity  of  compulsion.    When  man- 
kind is  morally  perfected  to  the  point  that  socialism  demands,  it 
will  make  little  difference  what  form  of  organization  is  adopted. 

141.  Socialism  in  present  politics.  Except  in  a  few  small  and 
scattered  communities  no  attempts  to  apply  the  principles  of 
socialism  to. their  full  extent  have  been  made.  At  the  same  time 
the  evils  pointed  out  by  socialism  are  becoming  generally  recog- 
nized, a  stronger  feeling  of  social  responsibility  is  replacing  the 
individualism  of  the  last  century,  and  many  socialist  doctrines  have 


388          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

been  given  practical  application  by  modern  states,  especially  in  the 
form  of  government  operation  and  regulation  of  industry.  In  ad- 
dition, socialist  political  parties  have  become  forces  in  actual  gov- 
ernment. In  continental  states,  where  party  groups  are  numerous, 
they  often  hold  the  balance  of  power,  and  they  have  recently 
become  of  some  importance  in  England  and  in  the  United  States.1 

Socialism  as  a  political  movement  took  first  a  revolutionary 
form,  aiming  at  the  immediate  overthrow  of  the  system  of  capital- 
ism. Such  was  the  purpose  of  the  socialists  who  took  an  active 
part  in  the  revolutions  of  1848  in  France,  Germany,  and  elsewhere. 
But  after  the  failure  of  that  movement,  a  realization  of  the  diffi- 
culties of  social  improvement  led  rather  to  attempts  at  constitutional 
methods  of  securing  practical  reforms. 

In  Germany  this  movement  had  its  origin  and  has  reached 
its  greatest  strength.  In  1863,  largely  through  the  influence  of 
Ferdinand  Lassalle,  a  General  Workingmen's  Association  was 
organized,  and  in  1867  the  German  Social  Democrats  entered  on 
their  first  electoral  campaign.  Schisms  within  the  ranks  of  this 
organization  and  the  rise  of  a  new  and  more  orthodox  socialist 
party  in  1869  led  to  a  feud  that  was  terminated  in  1875  by  the 
amalgamation  of  the  various  organizations,  giving  birth  to  the 
present  Social  Democratic  party.  In  spite  of  repressive  legislation, 
which  was  enacted  in  1878,  after  two  attempts  on  the  emperor's 
life,  and  which  remained  in  force  until  1890,  the  progress  of  the 
socialist  movement  has  been  rapid.  A  number  of  reforms,  such  as 
universal  suffrage  by  ballot,  direct  legislation,  freedom  of  the  press 
and  of  meeting,  proportional  representation,  a  graduated  income 
tax,  factory  and  labor  legislation,  and  the  substitution  of  militia  for 
the  standing  army,  were  outlined  by  the  Erfurt  Congress  ( 1 89 1 ) 2 
and  form  the  present  platform  of  the  party.  In  the  parliamentary 
elections  of  1906  more  than  three  and  one-quarter  million 
socialist  votes  were  cast,  sending  forty-three  members  to  the 
Reichstag?  The  Social  Democratic  party  is  to-day,  numerically, 
one  of  the  strongest  political  organizations  in  the  country.  In  the 

1  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  Part  I,  chap,  vi,  and  Appendix. 

2  See  Ely,  Socialism  and  Social  Reform,  Appendix  I. 

3  In  the  preceding  Reichstag  the  socialists  controlled  eighty-one  members. 


THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT  389 

elections  of  1920  the  Majority  Socialists,  in  control  of  the  govern- 
ment, cast  over  four  and  one-half  million  votes,  although  they  lost 
relatively  to  both  the  reactionary  and  the  revolutionary  groups. 

Socialism  in  France  has  had  a  confusing  development,  pro- 
gressing through  a  succession  of  divisions  and  fusions.  After  the 
fall  of  the  Paris  Commune  in  1871  socialism  was  dormant,  — per- 
secuted by  the  government,  —  though  growing  in  favor  among  the 
laboring  classes.  About  1880  one  branch  of  organized  labor  de- 
clared in  favor  of  socialism.  Two  years  later  this  group  was  further 
split  into  the  strict  adherents  of  Marxian  socialism  and  the  Pos- 
sibilists,  who  were  willing  to  accept  gradual  reforms  and  to  cooper- 
ate with  the  government.  Further  divisions  and  the  formation  of 
independent  groups  led  to  efforts  at  union  which  partially  succeeded 
in  1900.  The  acceptance  of  a  cabinet  portfolio  by  Millerand,  an 
independent  socialist,  following  the  Dreyfus  agitation,  led  to  a  new 
division  between  the  orthodox  socialists,  who  disliked  cooperation 
with  the  government,  and  the  "  Opportunists,"  who  approved  it. 
In  1905  the  leading  wings  again  united,  although  there  are  still 
numerous  independent  groups,  as  well  as  considerable  difference 
of  opinion  as  to  whether  socialism  should  aim  at  centralized  gov- 
ernmental control,  or  should  extend  its  already  strong  authority 
over  the  municipalities.  The  socialist  parliamentary  vote  in  1906 
was  over  one  million,  and  gave  the  party  seventy-six  members  in 
the  Chamber  of  Deputies. 

In  Austria  the  socialists  polled  over  one  million  votes  in  the 
parliamentary  election  of  1907  and  elected  eighty-seven  deputies 
to  the  Reichsrath.  In  Belgium,  where  the  socialists  aim  to  secure 
universal  suffrage,  they  polled  about  five  hundred  thousand  votes 
in  1908  and  elected  thirty-three  members  to  the  legislature.  In 
Italy  the  socialists,  though  divided  into  groups  on  questions  of 
policy  and  method,  are  exceptionally  strong.  In  1907  they  had 
twenty-five  representatives  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  and 
controlled  almost  one  hundred  municipalities. 

In  England  socialism  has  had  a  slow  and  uneventful  growth. 
The  Social  Democratic  Federation,  organized  in  1881,  is  the 
orthodox  representative  of  socialism ;  the  Fabian  Society,  founded 
in  1883,  has  carried  on  educational  propaganda  for  socialism 


390         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

has  achieved  notable  municipal  reforms ;  the  Independent  Labor 
party,  founded  in  1893,  represents  somewhat  broader  views  and 
lays  greater  emphasis  on  the  political  aspects  of  socialism.  These 
groups,  together  with  the  trades  unions  that  they  have  been  active 
in  establishing,  constitute  the  Labor  party,  with  a  voting  strength  of 
about  three  hundred  thousand  and  with  thirty-two  representatives 
in  the  House  of  Commons  (1909). 

In  the  United  States  socialism  took  first  the  form  of  Utopian 
communistic  experiments,  none  of  which,  in  spite  of  adherents  of 
national  reputation,  was  long  successful.  About  1868  numerous 
local  socialist  organizations  were  established,  but  these  rapidly  went 
to  pieces  after  the  industrial  crisis  of  1873.  The  first  national 
socialist  party  was  organized  in  1874,  finally  taking  the  name  of 
the  Socialist  Labor  party  of  North  America,  and  in  1892  nominat- 
ing a  presidential  ticket.  For  a  long  time  its  growth  was  slow,  its 
supporters  being  in  the  main  foreign  workingmen.  More  recently 
the  Socialist  party,  absorbing  the  greater  part  of  the  former  Social- 
ist Labor  party,  has  attained  considerable  strength.  At  present 
(1910)  it  has  about  thirty-two  hundred  local  organizations,  with 
an  active  membership  of  fifty  thousand,  and  in  the  presidential 
election  of  1908  polled  a  vote  of  over  four  hundred  thousand. 
Socialists  have  no  representation  in  the  United  States  Congress, 
but  they  control  seats  in  several  commonwealth  legislatures  and 
municipal  councils.  Their  activities  are  chiefly  directed  toward 
securing  practical  reforms  in  legislation  and  administration. 

One  of  the  results  of  the  work  of  Marx,  Engels,  and  other 
socialists,  and  of  the  strong  labor  movement  of  the  middle  of  the 
last  century,  was  the  formation  in  1864  of  the  International  Work- 
ingmen's  Association,  or,  as  it  is  usually  called,  the  International. 
This  movement  extended  over  the  greater  part  of  Europe  and  in- 
cluded Australia  and  the  United  States.  From  1864  to  1872  it  held 
six  conventions,  devoted  mainly  to  discussions  of  social  and  labor 
problems.  This  movement  was  discredited  because  of  its  support 
of  the  Paris  Commune  after  the  Franco-Prussian  War,  and  because 
of  the  growing  spirit  of  anarchism  among  its  members.  Con- 
sequently, in  1872,  the  seat  of  its  general  council  was  transferred  to 
New  York,  and  in  1876  the  International  was  formally  dissolved. 


THE  PROVINCE  OF  GOVERNMENT  391 

Since  1889  international  socialist  and  labor  conferences  have 
again  been  held  at  intervals  of  two  to  four  years,  the  Stuttgart 
Congress  of  1907  being  attended  by  about  one  thousand  delegates, 
representing  twenty-five  different  countries.  The  Paris  Congress 
of  1900  established  a  permanent  International  Socialist  Bureau, 
composed  of  two  representatives  from  each  affiliated  country.  This 
bureau  is  the  executive  committee  of  the  international  congresses 
and  has  its  headquarters  and  permanent  secretary  in  Brussels. 

It  is  unquestionably  true  that  numerous  reforms  in  social  legis- 
lation have  been  either  the  direct  work  of  socialism  in  politics,  the 
indirect  results  of  its  influence,  or  concessions  to  its  strength. 
Workingmen's  insurance,  factory  laws,  industrial  courts,  the  civil 
code,  protective  tariffs,  taxation,  and  extended  suffrage  have  all 
been  affected  by  the  efforts  of  its  adherents.  However,  it  has  been 
in  the  local  divisions,  especially  in  municipalities,  that  socialism 
has  achieved  its  greatest  triumphs.  In  France  particularly,  where, 
in  1904,  one  wing  of  the  socialist  party  had  full  control  of  the 
administration  of  sixty-three  municipalities,  also  in  Italy,  Belgium, 
Austria,  Norway,  Denmark,  and  to  a  less  degree  in  Sweden,  Eng- 
land, and  the  United  States,  socialists  have  put  into  practical 
application  their  administrative  theories.  Care  of  the  poor,  espe- 
cially of  children,  extension  of  education,  improved  sanitation, 
popular  concerts,  lectures,  and  theaters  are  among  their  activities, 
together  with  the  regulation  or  municipal  operation  of  public 
utilities,  such  as  water,  light,  transportation,  and  communication. 


OUTLINE  OF  CHAPTER  XXV 

REFERENCES 
'Is*    CLASSIFICATION  OF  GOVERNMENTAL  FUNCTIONS 

1.  ESSENTIAL  FUNCTIONS 

a.  Power 

b.  Liberty 

2.  OPTIONAL  FUNCTIONS 

a.  Nonsocialistic 

b.  Socialistic 

ESSENTIAL  FUNCTIONS 

1.  GOVERNMENTAL 

a.  Foreign  relations 

b.  Internal  legislation  and  administration 

2.  FINANCIAL 

3.  MILITARY 

OPTIONAL  FUNCTIONS 

1.  STATE  MANAGEMENT  OF  INDUSTRY 

a.  Fiscal  monopolies 

b.  Social  monopolies 

2.  REGULATION  OF  TRADE  AND  INDUSTRY 

a.  Trust  regulation 

b.  Railroad  regulation 

c.  The  tariff 

3.  REGULATION  OF  LABOR 

a.  Conditions  of  employment 

b.  Conditions  of  remuneration 

p 

c.  Results  of  employment 

4.  EDUCATION 

5.  CARE  OF  THE  POOR  AND  INCAPABLE 

6.  SANITATION  AND  HEALTH 


392 


CHAPTER  XXV 
THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT 

REFERENCES 

AMOS,  S.  The  Science  of  Politics,  chap,  x 

BASTABLE,  C.  F.  Public  Finance 

BEMIS,  E.  W.  Municipal  Monopolies 

DEALEY,  J.  Q.  The  Development  of  the  State,  chaps,  iv-v 

ELY,  R.  T.  Monopolies  and  Trusts 

FREUND,  E.  The  Police  Power 

HART,  A.  B.  Actual  Government,  Parts  VI-X 

HENDERSON,  C.  R.  Dependents,  Defectives,  Delinquents 

HOBSON,  J.  Evolution  of  Modern  Capitalism,  chaps,  iii-v 

JOHNSON,  E.  R.  American  Railway  Transportation,  Part  IV 

JOHNSON,  E.  R.  Ocean  and  Inland  Water  Transportation,  chaps,  xv-xxiii 

LEACOCK,  S.  Elements  of  Political  Science,  pp.  386-409 

LEROY-BEAULIEU,  P.  The  Modern  State,  pp.  1-91 

SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.  Essays  in  Taxation 

SELIGMAN,  E.  R.  A.  Principles  of  Economics,  chap,  xxxiii 

WILLOUGHBY,  W.  W.  The  Nature  of  the  State,  pp.  343-350 

WILSON,  W.  The  State,  chap,  xv 

WRIGHT,  C.  D.  Practical  Sociology,  Parts  III-VIII 

142.  Classification  of  governmental  functions.  Turning  from 
the  theoretical  questions  of  the  purpose  for  which  the  state  exists 
and  the  functions  that  it  may  properly  perform,  to  a  study  of  mod- 
ern states  in  actual  operation,  one  finds  a  remarkable  agreement  in 
the  general  nature  of  governmental  activities.  In  their  dealings 
with  one  another  states  follow  a  recognized  code;  in  the  internal 
administration  of  all  states  the  same  chief  departments  are  found ; 
legal  principles,  modes  of  procedure  in  legislation  and  administra- 
tion, and  the  problems  that  governments  are  called  upon  to  solve, 
are  in  most  respects  similar. 

All  states,  while  potentially  capable  of  exercising  the  full  meas- 
ure of  their  sovereign  powers,  realize  the  importance  of  guarantee- 
ing a  field  of  individual  liberty  against  governmental  encroach- 
ment. Accordingly  they  place  constitutional  restrictions  upon  the 
unlimited  exercise  of  sovereignty,  although  in  time  of  war,  or  even 

393 


394         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

in  time  of  peace,  through  the  exercise  of  the  police  power  with  its 
resultant  powers  of  taxation  and  eminent  domain,  the  state  has  a 
legal  basis  for  extending  its  activities  if  needful  for  the  safety  and 
welfare  of  its  people. 

Again,  all  the  leading  states  are  organized  on  an  individualistic 
basis.  In  no  state  is  there  common  property  in  the  means  of  pro- 
duction, nor  are  equal  wages  nor  universal  employment  guaranteed 
by  any  government.  At  the  same  time  there  is  evident  a  strong 
reaction  against  the  extreme  principles  of  individualism.  Modern 
governments  are  entering  upon  a  constantly  widening  sphere  of 
activities,  especially  in  connection  with  industry.  Government 
ownership  and  management  of  various  kinds  of  business,  govern- 
ment regulation  of  commerce,  manufacture,  and  prices,  and  gov- 
ernment interference  on  behalf  of  the  laboring  class  are  the  most 
important  examples  of  this  tendency.  Besides,  modern  states  are 
undertaking  many  functions  for  the  general  welfare  of  their  citi- 
zens, each  state  deciding,  in  accordance  with  existing  conditions, 
whether  the  advantages  derived  from  public  control  will  more  than 
compensate  for  the  possible  weakening  of  the  self-reliance  of  .its 
people,  for  the  encroachment  upon  their  personal  freedom,  for  the 
danger  of  corrupt  influences  in  government,  and  for  the  creating 
of  precedents  for  the  assumption  of  activities  by  the  state  that  will 
be  detrimental  to  the  general  interest.1 

A  further  analysis  shows  that  the  functions  exercised  by  govern- 
ments in  leading  modern  states  may  be  broadly  classified  under 
two  heads : 

I.  Essential  functions.  "It  is  admitted  by  all  that  the  state 
should  possess  powers  sufficiently  extensive  for  the  maintenance 
of  its  own  continued  existence  against  foreign  interference,  to  pro- 
vide the  means  whereby  its  national  life  may  be  preserved  and 
developed,  and  to  maintain  internal  order,  including  the  protection 
of  life,  liberty,  and  property.  These  have  been  designated  the 
essential  functions  of  the  state,  and  are  such  as  must  be  possessed 
by  a  state,  whatever  its  form."  2  These  functions  are  determined 
by  the  threefold  relations  of  state  to  state,  of  state  to  citizen,  and 
of  citizen  to  citizen.  The  state  must  determine  its  relations  to 

1  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State,  p.  338.  2  Ibid.,  p.  310. 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT  395 

other  states  in  peace  and  in  war  ;  it  must  determine  its  relation  to  its 
own  citizens  as  to  their  share  in  political  power,  their  freedom  from 
governmental  interference,  and  their  actions  that  are  dangerous 
to  state  existence  ;  and  it  must  regulate  the  dealings  of  its  citizens 
with  one  another  so  as  to  secure  order  and  justice.  In  carrying  out 
these  functions  the  maintenance  of  army,  navy,  and  a  large  number 
of  officials,  the  raising  and  expenditure  of  vast  sums  of  money,  and 
the  exercise  of  extensive  and  varied  powers  are  necessary. 

A  closer  examination  of  the  essential  functions  of  the  state 
shows  that  they  follow  naturally  from  the  definition  of  the  state 
and  from  its  essential  attribute  —  sovereignty.  Consequently  they 
must  adjust  the  relation  of  sovereignty,  in  its  external  aspect,  to 
other  states,  and,  in  its  internal  aspect,  to  individual  liberty.  These 
functions  are  therefore  concerned  with  the  sovereignty  of  the  state 
in  its  two  aspects  of : 

(a)  Power.  These  include  the  diplomatic  and  military  relations 
of  a  state  to  other  states,  the  maintenance  of  state  existence  by  the 
rights  of  taxation  and  eminent  domain,  and  the  maintenance  of 
order  and  security  by  means  of  the  police  service  and  the  criminal 
law.  These  functions  emphasize  the  Authority  of  the  state. 

"(b)  Liberty.  These  include  the  determination  of  the  rights  of 
citizens  to  share  in  governing,  the  education  of  citizens  in  political 
methods,  and  improvements  in  state  organization  and  administra- 
tion. On  its  negative  side  it  includes  a  guarantee,  within  a  certain 
field,  against  interference  on  the  part  of  either  government  or  indi- 
vidual, maintained  by  the  laws  and  the  courts.  These  functions 
emphasize  the  political  and  civil  liberty  of  the  individual. 

2.  Optional  functions.  These  are  exercised  not  because  they 
are  essential  to  the  existence  of  the  state  and  the  maintenance  of 
its  power,  or  to  the  liberty  and  security  of  its  citizens,  but  because 
they  are  expected  to  promote  general  welfare  morally,  intellectu- 
ally, or  economically.  While  optional,  they  are  at  the  present  time 
of  great  importance,  in  many  cases  the  boundary  line  separating 
them  from  the  essential  functions  being  extremely  difficult  to  deter- 
mine. They  include  activities  which,  if  left  to  individuals,  would 
be  either  inefficiently  or  unjustly  performed  or  not  performed  at 
all.  Accordingly  they  may  be  subdivided  into: 


396         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

(a)  Nonsocialistic.    These  are  functions  which,  if  not  assumed 
by  the  state,  would  not  be  undertaken  at  all.    The  activity  of  the 
state  in  this  field  does,  therefore,  not  limit  or  interfere  with  private 
enterprise.    Under  this  head  come  care  of  the  poor  and  incapable, 
maintenance  of  public  parks  and  libraries,  sanitation,  certain  forms 
of  education,  and  the  large  amount  of  investigating  and  statistical 
work  the  purpose  of  which  is  to  improve  the  environment  and  give 
information  by  which  further  improvement  may  be  made. 

(b)  Socialistic.    These  are  functions  that  admit  of  private  initi- 
ative, but  are  frequently  taken  over,  wholly  or  in  part,  by  the  state, 
either  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  the  evils  of  private  control  or 
because  they  can  be  more  effectively  managed  by  governmental 
authority.    Examples  are  state  ownership  and  operation  of  railroads 
or  telegraph  lines,  and  municipal  control  of  water,  gas,  and  electric 
light.     Regulation  of  labor  and  prices  partakes  of  the  nature  of 
both  socialistic  and  nonsocialistic  functions. 

It  may  be  noted  that  because  of  the  different  conditions  that 
prevail  in  modern  states,  enterprises  that  in  some  states  are  social- 
istic may  be  nonsocialistic  in  others.  For  example,  it  was  found 
commercially  impossible  to  have  railroads  built  by  private  initiative 
in  Italy.  Accordingly  their  construction  and  operation  by  the 
government  was  not  socialistic,  since  they  were  not  taken  out  of 
the  hands  of  private  enterprise. 

143.  Essential  functions.  Every  state  finds  it  necessary  to  main- 
tain social  order,  to  provide  for  the  protection  of  person  and 
property,  to  fix  the  legal  relations  of  the  family,  to  regulate  the 
holding,  transmission,  and  interchange  of  property,  to  determine 
contract  rights  and  the  liability  for  debt,  to  define  and  punish 
crime,  and  to  administer  justice  in  civil  cases.  Besides,  the  state 
must  determine  the  political  duties,  privileges,  and  relations  of  its 
citizens,  and  must  preserve  its  life  and  maintain  its  political  rela- 
tionship with  foreign  powers.1 

These  essential  functions  of  the  state,  in  so  far  as  they  are  con- 
cerned with  foreign  relations  or  with  the  general  legislative,  judi- 
cial, and  administrative  regulation  of  the  activities  of  individuals, 
have  been  discussed  in  preceding  chapters.2  There  are,  however, 

1  Wilson,  The  State,  pp.  613-614.       2  See  Chapters  XI-XII,  XVIII-XXIII. 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT  397 

two  branches  of  administration  common  to  all  states,  that  demand 
additional  attention.  These  are  the  activities  of  the  state  con- 
cerned with  financial  and  military  affairs.  In  order  that  the  gov- 
ernment may  perform  its  duties  it  must  have  pecuniary  means. 
In  case  of  attempts  made  against  its  existence  or  power  by  other 
states,  or  against  its  peace  and  order  by  its  own  citizens,  an  army 
and  usually  a  navy  are  demanded.  Financial  and  military  functions 
are  therefore  essential  to  the  state,  both  in  its  dealings  with  other/ 
states  and  in  its  relation  to  its  own  inhabitants.  A  brief  statement 
of  the  leading  features  of  these  important  governmental  activities 
follows : 

I.  Financial  fzmctions.  The  evolution  of  taxation  shows  the 
various  phases  through  which  social  and  political  organization  has 
passed.1  The  primitive  state,  whose  chief  activity  was  war,  de- 
manded of  its  citizens  military  service,  and  developed  regulations 
as  to  the  equipment  and  supplies  to  be  furnished.  The  treasury  of 
the  state  was  identical  with  the  wealth  of  the  chief  or  king,  and 
was  maintained  by  gifts  or  tribute,  by  the  yields  from  conquered 
lands,  or  by  raids  on  neighboring  peoples.  As  the  internal  activities 
of  the  state  increased,  service  in  time  of  peace  was  also  demanded, 
and  forced  labor  or  a  percentage  on  flocks  and  harvests  furnished 
the  needed  income.  As  wealth  increased,  personal  services  were 
usually  commuted  for  some  form  of  payment.  Taxation  of  produce 
was  changed  to  a  money  payment  on  the  land  itself  ;  and,  as  manu- 
factures and  commerce  grew,  various  kinds  of  movables  were  also 
compelled  to  contribute  their  share.  In  addition,  large  sums  were 
raised  by  irregular  means,  such  as  forced  loans,  confiscation,  and 
exorbitant  fees.  The  sale  of  offices  or  of  monopolies  and  the 
debasement  of  the  coinage  were  also  common.  As  economic  con- 
ditions changed,  new  forms  of  taxation  became  possible.  In 
addition  to  the  poll  tax  and  to  taxes  on  incomes  and  inheritances, 
all  of  which  have  been  in  use  for  a  long  time,  taxes  have  been 
laid  on  the  manufacture  of  goods,  on  the  privilege  of  carrying  on 
certain  kinds  of  business,  on  special  business  transactions,  and  on 
goods  sent  out  or  brought  into  a  state.  More  recently  corporation 
and  franchise  taxes  have  furnished  large  incomes. 

1  Dealey,  The  Development  of  the  State,  pp.  65-69. 


398          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

The  method  of  levying  taxes  has  also  undergone  significant 
change.  The  tyrannical  power  of  officials  who  "  farmed  "  or  leased 
the  right  to  collect  the  taxes,  and  the  burdensome  feudal  obliga- 
tions of  the  Middle  Ages  are  now  replaced  by  systems  of  assess- 
ment and  collection  by  responsible  governmental  officials.  Several 
forms  of  taxation,  because  of  their  effects  on  private  enterprise, 
shade  off  into  the  optional  functions  of  the  state  and  will  be  dis- 
cussed more  fully  in  a  later  section.1  Of  such  nature  are  tariffs, 
when  levied  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  home  manufactures 
as  well  as  for  revenue ;  and  licenses,  whose  aim  is  to  regulate 
the  manufacture  or  sale  of  commodities  such  as  alcoholic  liquors 
or  foodstuffs. 

Other  financial  functions  of  the  state  include  the  maintenance 
of  coinage  and  currency ;  the  administration  of  public  property, 
such  as  public  lands  or  forests,  public  buildings,  and  munitions  of 
war ;  state  monopolies,  such  as  the  postal  service  and,  in  some 
states,  railroads  and  telegraphs,  or  certain  commodities,  such  as 
tobacco  and  salt.  The  management  of  the  public  debt  is  an  allied 
function. 

The  financial  situation  (1920)  in  the  national  governments  of 
leading  modern  states  may  be  briefly  outlined  as  follows : 

(a)  France.   The  annual  national  income  is  twenty-two  billion 
francs  and  the  annual  expenditure  is  almost  thirty  billion  francs. 
Revenue  is  derived  mainly  from  direct  and  indirect  taxes,  cus- 
toms, state  monopolies,  tax  on  unearned  incomes,  and  the  sugar 
tax.   More  than  half  of  all  expenditure  goes  to  pay  charges  on  the 
national  debt ;  war,  navy,  posts  and  telegraphs,  education,  public 
works,  and  civil  service  are  the  other  most  important  items.   The 
national  debt  has  grown  from  about  forty  billion  francs  in  1914  to 
two  hundred  and  eighty-five  billion  francs  in  1920. 

(b)  Germany.     Revenues   and    expenditures   in   the   ordinary 
budget  average  about  forty  billion  marks  each.    The  extraordinary 
budget  provides  for  revenue  of  two  and  a  quarter  billion  marks 
and  expenditure  of  fifty-two  billion  marks.    Income  is  derived 
mainly  from  direct  and  indirect  taxes,  the  taxing  power  of  the 
national  government  in  the  present  republic  being  considerably 

1  See  section  144. 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT  399 

more  extensive  than  was  the  case  in  the  former  empire.  The  chief 
expenditures  are  for  debt,  pensions,  civil  service,  and  army.  The 
national  debt  increased  from  twelve  billion  marks  in  1915  to  three 
hundred  billion  marks  in  1920. 

(c)  Great  Britain.    Revenues   and   expenditures   each   average 
about  one  and  one-quarter  billion  pounds  annually.    The  chief 
sources   of  revenue   are  customs,  excises,   property  and   income 
taxes,  estate  and  stamp  duties,  and  income  from  posts  and  tele- 
graphs.   The  national  debt,  civil  service,  and  army  and  navy  are 
the  chief  items  of  expenditure.    The  national  debt  is  almost  eight 
billion  pounds,  partly  offset  by  debts  owed  to  England  by  states 
to  whom  she  made  loans  during  the  war.    The  annual  cost  of  the 
national  debt  is  over  three  hundred  million  pounds. 

(d)  The  United  States.    Ordinary  revenues  and  expenditures 
each  average  about  five  billion  dollars  annually.   The  chief  sources 
of  income  are  customs,  internal  revenue,  and  postal  service.  Since 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  provides  that  direct  taxation 
at  the  hands  of  the  federal  government  must  be  levied  in  propor- 
tion to  population,1  and  that  it  must  be  apportioned  among  the 
commonwealths   "according  to  their  respective   numbers,"2  the 
inequitable  distribution  that  would  result  from  these  restrictions 
is  so  evident  that  the  federal  government  is  practically  limited 
to  indirect  taxation.    The  federal  corporation  tax  and  the  recently 
adopted  constitutional  amendment  permitting  the  levy  of  an  income 
tax  are  attempts  to  extend  national  control  over  direct  taxation. 
On  the  other  hand,  since  the  commonwealths  are  forbidden  to 
levy  import  duties,3  and  since  commonwealth  taxation  on  goods 
manufactured  within  their  jurisdiction  would  tend  to  drive  such 
industries  to  other  commonwealths,  and  since  taxation  on  goods 
manufactured  elsewhere  would  probably  be  considered  interference 
with  interstate  commerce,  the  commonwealths  and  local  govern- 
ments are  practically  limited  to  direct  taxation.  The  chief  expendi- 
tures are  for  the  national  debt,  army  and  navy,  civil  service,  postal 
service,   and   pensions.    The  national   debt  is  about  twenty-four 
billion  dollars,  most  of  which  was  incurred  in  the  form  of  bonds 
issued  during  the  recent  World  War. 

1  Article  I,  section  9.  2  Article  I,  section  2.  3  Article  I,  section  10. 


400         INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

It  must  be  remembered  that  in  all  these  states  local  and  colonial 
finance  is  of  great  importance,  revenues  being  derived  mainly  from 
direct  taxation  and  expended  for  purposes  of  general  welfare. 
Especially  in  federal  states,  such  as  Germany  and  the  United 
States,  many  functions  are  performed  by  the  commonwealths  rather 
than  by  the  national  governments. 

In  adjusting  expenditures  to  revenue  several  systems  are  in  use  : 

(a)  In  despotic  states  the  government  takes  all  that  it  can  with- 
out crippling  the  resources  of  the  country  so  seriously  that  future 
taxes  would  be  impossible.    The  revenues  thus  raised  are  spent  at 
the  will  of  persons  irresponsible  to  the  people. 

(b)  In  most  of  the  democratic  states  the  budget  of  necessary 
expenditures  is  calculated  and  the  probable  income  from  ordinary 
revenues  estimated.    The  difference  is  then  adjusted  by  increasing 
or  diminishing  some  small  elastic  tax. 

(c)  In  the  United  States  federal  government,  whose  income  is 
derived  largely  from  tariff  on  imports  and  from  excises  on  com- 
modities of  internal   production,  the  national  revenue  cannot  be 
accurately  foretold,  since  it  fluctuates  according  to  the  prosperity  of 
the  country.    Besides,  these  taxes  are  not  elastic,  since  they  are 
changed  only  after  lengthy  deliberation  by  Congress.   Consequently 
there  is  little  direct  relation  between  revenue  and  the  needs  of  the 
government,  and  money  is  spent  to  balance  the  revenue,  whatever 
it  may  happen  to  be. 

2.  MUiJary junctions .  War  was  the  chief  function  of  early  states, 
their  greatness  depending  in  the  main  on  their  military  strength. 
All  citizens  were  soldiers,  although  their  training  and  equipment 
were  largely  matters  of  private  concern,  and  their  provisions 
and  pay  were  secured  by  plunder  and  conquest.  At  the  present 
time,  war,  though  an  exceptional  activity  of  the  state,  is  still  im- 
portant;  and  military  preparation,  largely  a  matter  of  technical 
training  and  material  equipment,  is  carried  on  extensively  and  by 
the  state  alone.  In  addition  to  armies,  all  important  states  possess 
navies  ;  and  modern  warfare  is  determined  largely  by  the  outcome 
of  war  at  sea  and  by  the  ability  to  maintain  the  financial  burdens 
that  modern  warfare  entails.  Ordinarily  both  armies  and  navies 
are  considered  safeguards  of  peace  rather  than  direct  challenges 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT  401 

to  war ;  armies  being  used  to  maintain  internal  order,  and  navies 
to  protect  commerce  and  colonies.  States  whose  frontiers  are 
exposed  or  who  are  surrounded  by  hostile  neighbors,  making  war 
always  imminent,  give  all  men  military  training  and  constantly 
keep  a  large  number  ready  for  immediate  service.  Such  was  the 
case  in  France  and  Germany,  where  military  service  was  compul- 
sory, where  standing  armies  numbering  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
men  were  constantly  under  arms,  and  where  all  able-bodied  men 
formed  a  military  reserve  in  case  of  need.  In  states  such  as  Great 
Britain  and  the  United  States,  whose  geographic  position  makes 
invasion  difficult,  military  service  is  not  compulsory.  Volunteers 
are  depended  upon  except  in  the  greatest  wars,  and  a  small  stand- 
ing army  is  maintained  for  purposes  of  internal  administration  and 
as  the  nucleus  for  a  volunteer  army  if  war  should  occur. 

On  the  other  hand,  states  isolated  by  the  sea,  or  possessing 
scattered  colonies  or  extensive  commerce,  aim  to  maintain  large 
navies.  Great  Britain  until  recently  considered  it  essential  that  her 
naval  strength  be  greater  than  that  of  any  other  two  states ;  while 
the  United  States,  Germany,  France,  and  Japan  vied  with  one 
another  in  the  size  and  efficiency  of  their  naval  armaments.  All 
states  spend  immense  sums  in  building  military  works  and  naval 
stations,  and  in  accumulating  munitions  of  war.  Schools  for  train- 
ing military  and  naval  officers  are  established,  pensions  furnished 
to  disabled  veterans,  and  experiments  in  improved  methods  of 
destruction  encouraged. 

In  all  the  leading  states  a  large  proportion  of  national  income 
is  expended  on  the  army  and  navy.  Even  in  the  United  States, 
where  the  danger  of  war  is  comparatively  remote,  three  fourths 
of  the  expenditure  of  the  federal  government  is  needed  for  army, 
navy,  and  pensions.  If  to  this  be  added  the  cost  of  the  expen- 
sive and  ineffective  "  state  militia,"  the  proportions  of  the  military 
function,  even  in  a  peaceful  industrial  state,  will  be  evident. 

144.  Optional  functions.  It  is  evident  that  functions  undertaken 
for  general-welfare  purposes  vary  in  different  states  and  at  different 
periods.  In  some  respects  modern  states  have  limited  the  scope 
of  their  activities.  The  private  life  of  individuals  and  their  intel- 
lectual and  religious  beliefs  are  seldom  interfered  with,  and  the 


402          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

family  and  the  church,  once  merged  in  the  state,  are  now  separate 
institutions.  Even  these,  however,  are  legally  subordinate  to  the 
state,  and  some  of  their  most  important  powers  have  been  trans- 
ferred to  it.  Marriage  and  divorce  are  civil  functions,  rights 
of  kinship  and  inheritance  are  regulated  by  law,  and  in  the  case 
of  parental  neglect  or  orphanage  the  state  undertakes  the  care  of 
children.  Similarly,  the  state  dispenses  charity,  regulates  morals 
and  amusements,  provides  education  and  undertakes  scientific 
investigation,  —  all  of  which  were  at  one  time  under  the  control 
of  the  church. 

The  development  of  modern  industrial  conditions  has  made  the 
state  particularly  important  both  as  a  conservative  and  as  a  con- 
structive agent.  As  industrial  society  becomes  more  complex  and 
interdependent,  general  welfare  demands  that  the  interests  of  the 
individual  be  increasingly  subordinated  to  those  of  the  community. 
This  tendency  is  aided  by  the  growing  confidence  of  mankind  in 
its  ability  to  improve  its  environment  and  reform  its  institutions, 
and  by  the  democratic  basis  of  the  state,  as  a  result  of  which  its 
action  is  welcomed  rather  than  opposed  or  regarded  with  suspicion. 
States  have  worked  out  fairly  well  their  external  relations  and  the 
political  status  of  their  citizens.  The  wars  and  revolutions  of  the 
past  century  have  been  replaced  by  intense  interest  in  economic 
matters  ;  commercial  relations  form  the  subjects  of  most  treaties  ; 
and  legislatures  are  concerned  with  the  problems  of  tariffs,  corpo- 
rations, and  currency. 

The  following  are  some  of  the  most  important  functions  that 
modern  states,  in  varying  degrees,  deem  it  advisable  to  undertake : 

I.  State  management  of  industry.  Governments  may  enter 
upon  business  enterprises  for  the  purpose  of  securing  revenue  or 
for  general  social  reasons.  Accordingly  government  monopolies 
may  be  divided  into : 

(a)  Fiscal  monopolies.  Certain  articles  of  wide  consumption 
easily  lend  themselves  to  a  form  of  taxation  if  operated  by  states 
for  profit.  Other  commodities  may  be  monopolized  for  the  pur- 
pose of  regulating  their  use.  Examples  of  fiscal  monopolies  in 
modern  states  are  tobacco,  matches,  and  gunpowder  in  France, 
salt  in  Saxony,  opium  in  some  of  the  Eastern  countries,  and  spirits 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT  403 

in  Russia  and  Switzerland.    Lotteries,  formerly  common,  survive 
in  some  states. 

(b)  Social  monopolies.  These  enterprises  are  undertaken  by 
states  because  of  their  public  importance.  At  first  in  private  hands, 
they  have  gradually  come  under  government  regulation,  and  at 
present  in  many  states  they  are  under  governmental  management. 
Sometimes  they  are  managed  for  profit,  sometimes  fees  are  charged 
to  cover  expenses,  and  sometimes  the  service  is  free,  the  expenses 
being  covered  by  general  taxation.  Existing  examples  of  govern- 
ment ownership,  some  of  which  are  undertaken  by  national  and 
others  by  local  organs,  may  be  classified  under  the  following  heads : 1 

1 i )  Transfer  of  values,  —  coinage,  currency,  and  banking. 

(2)  Transfer  of  products,  —  markets,  docks,  and  piers. 

(3)  Transmission  of  intelligence,  —  post  office,  telegraph,  and 
telephone. 

(4)  Transportation  of  persons  and  commodities,  —  roads,  canals, 
ferries,  bridges,  railroads,  and  express  companies. 

(5)  Transmission  of  utilities  and  power,  —  water  works,  gas  and 
electric-light  works,  electric-power  works,  steam-heat  and  hot-water 
lines,  irrigation  and  power  canals. 

In  some  states  the  peculiar  public  importance  of  certain  func- 
tions or  the  inability  of  individuals  to  conduct  them  may  lead  to 
public  management  of  activities  usually  in  private  hands ;  in  other 
states  the  magnitude  of  certain  interests,  with  resultant  danger 
of  inefficiency  or  of  political  corruption,  may  be  sufficient  reason 
to  prevent  government  ownership.  The  success  of  public  manage- 
ment of  railways  in  Prussia  is  not  sufficient  reason  for  the  assump- 
tion of  that  function  by  the  government  of  the  United  States. 

2.  Regulation  of  trade  and  industry.  In  addition  to  regulations 
for  the  benefit  of  consumers,  safeguarding  health  by  food  inspec- 
tion and  quarantine  regulation,  and  for  the  benefit  of  producers  by 
means  of  so-called  labor  laws,  governments  protect  investors  by 
regulating  banks,  trust  companies,  and  insurance,  and  by  defining 
and  enforcing  the  obligations  of  officers  of  corporations.  Modern 
states  fix  standards  of  weights  and  measures,  license  trades  and 
businesses,  and  regulate  navigation.  Inventors  and  authors  are 

1  Seligman,  Principles  of  Economics,  p.  564. 


404          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

protected  by  patent  and  copyright  laws,  and  certain  industries  are 
aided  by  bounties  and  subsidies.  Shipping  subsidies,  partly  for  the 
purpose  of  developing  a  merchant  marine  and  partly  for  auxiliary 
naval  purposes,  are  paid  by  Great  Britain,  Germany,  France,  and 
Japan.  In  the  United  States,  postal  subsidies  alone  are  given, 
but  in  other  states  additional  subsidies  for  tonnage  and  even  for 
construction  have  been  granted. 

The  most  important  governmental  regulations  of  industry  are 
undertaken  in  behalf  of  the  general  public  welfare,  and  deal  with 
trusts,  railroads,  and  the  tariff.  These  will  be  considered  in  order : 

(a)  Trust  regulation.    In  the  regime  of  small-scale  production 
and  competition  prices  were  automatically  regulated  by  demand  and 
supply.    Present  methods  of  large-scale  machine  production  and 
the    immense  accumulations  of  capital  by  means   of  joint-stock 
companies  have  made  it  difficult  for  small  concerns  to  maintain 
successful  competition,  and  have  made  possible  a  monopoly  con- 
trol of  certain  commodities,  in  some  cases  including  articles  of  prime 
necessity,  at  the  hands  of  large  industrial  corporations.    In  such 
cases  prices  may  be  fixed  at  the  point  of  highest  net  returns,  and 
the  interests  of  the  public  may  suffer.    In  addition,  the  evils  of 
speculation  and  overcapitalization  and  of  corrupting  public  officials 
are  often  laid  at  the  door  of  the  trusts.    As  a  result  modern  gov- 
ernments have  found  some  form  of  regulation  necessary.    In  the 
United  States  the  Sherman  Antitrust  Law  (1891)  forbids  contracts 
or  combinations  in  restraint  of,  or  in  monopoly  of,  "  interstate  " 
trade.    Many  of  the  commonwealths  have  also  legislated  against 
trusts,  although  such  legislation  is  frequently  evaded,  and  much  of 
it  has  been  declared  invalid  by  the  courts.    At  present  efforts  are 
being  made  to  secure  publicity,  and  a  certain  amount  of  restraint 
is  imposed  by  increasing  taxation. 

(b)  Railroad  reflation.    Railroads  differ  from  ordinary  indus- 
trial enterprises  in  several  important  respects.    They  are  natural 
monopolies,  and  active  competition  among  them  is  uneconomic  and 
undesirable.    Since  their  greatest  expenses  are  fixed  charges,  little 
affected  by  the  quantity  of  business,  their  rates  cannot  be  fixed  on 
the  basis  of  cost  of  production,  but  must  be  levied  in  accordance 
with  "  what  the  traffic  will  bear."     This  makes  possible  unjust 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT 


405 


discriminations  affecting  persons,  places,  and  commodities.  Finally, 
they  are  "  quasi-public  corporations,"  exercising  privileges  and  per- 
forming services  that  affect  the  general  welfare.  As  a  result,  all 
states  have  taken  action  looking  to  their  control  or  regulation.  In 
Prussia,  Austria,  Hungary,  Australia,  and  elsewhere  railways  are 
owned  and  operated  by  the  government.  In  France  limited  char- 
ters are  granted  to  private  companies,  with  the  provision  that  the 
railways  become  the  property  of  the  state  after  a  certain  period. 
Meantime  regulation  by  the  government  is  extensive.  In  Great 
Britain  and  the  United  States  railways  are  left  in  private  hands, 
but  provision  is  made  for  government  regulation.  In  Great  Britain 
a  commission  supervises  the  operation  of  railroads,  discrimination 
is  forbidden  by  law,  and  maximum  rates  must  be  approved  by  the 
Board  of  Trade.  Most  of  the  United  States  commonwealths  have 
established  railroad  commissions  and  have  passed  laws  against  dis- 
crimination and  combinations.  The  federal  Interstate  Commerce 
Act  (1887),  as  extended  by  the  Elkins  Law  (1903),  together  with 
the  Antitrust  Law  (1891),  aims  to  maintain  competition  by  prevent- 
ing combinations  and  "pooling,"  and  at  the  same  time  forbids 
discriminations  or  rebates,  and  prohibits  a  greater  charge  for  a 
shorter  than  for  a  longer  distance  over  the  same  line.  An  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  of  five  members,  appointed  by  the 
president,  is  given  authority  to  supervise  these  provisions,  but  its 
powers  have  thus  far  been  limited  by  evasions  and  by  adverse 
judicial  decisions. 

(c)  The  tariff.  In  ancient  and  medieval  times  both  internal  and 
external  trade  was  hampered  by  burdensome  taxes,  tolls,  prohibi- 
tions, and  monopolies.  Even  after  internal  trade  was  freed  from 
these  restrictions,  the  growth  of  commerce  and  colonies  and  the 
keen  national  rivalries  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries 
led  to  that  regulation  of  manufactures  and  commerce  known  as  the 
mercantile  system.  After  the  Industrial  Revolution  the  economic, 
supremacy  of  England  and  her  transition  from  an  exporter  to  an 
importer  of  food,  as  manufactures  replaced  agriculture,  led  to  the 
removal  of  duties  on  manufactures  and  finally  on  agricultural 
products.  Other  states  followed  a  similar  tendency  until  the  revival 
of  national  spirit  in  Germany,  Italy,  and  elsewhere  during  the 


406          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

nineteenth  century  caused  a  strong  reaction  in  favor  of  protection. 
In  the  United  States  the  protective  policy  was  adopted  after  the 
War  of  1812,  when  foreign  competition  threatened  to  destroy  the 
beginnings  of  American  industry,  and,  except  for  a  brief  period  in 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century,  it  has  continued  to  the  pres- 
ent time.  Even  in  Great  Britain,  whose  industrial  supremacy  is 
now  threatened,  there  is  a  strong  movement  in  favor  of  protective 
duties. 

Aside  from  the  value  of  import  duties  as  an  easy  and  profitable 
method  of  raising  revenue,  the  leading  arguments  at  present 
advanced  in  their  favor  are : 

(a)  The   infant-industry  argument.     Newly  started    industries, 
unable  to  compete  with  older  and  better-established  foreign  rivals, 
need  temporary  assistance  during  their  transition  period.    This 
will  be  amply  repaid  by  lower  prices,  due  to  competition,  after  the 
home    industries   are    fully    developed.     This    is    evidently    not 
defensible  as  a  permanent   policy. 

(b)  The  variegated  production  argument.    This  emphasizes  the 
value  of  national  industrial  independence  and  a  well-rounded  eco- 
nomic life.    Otherwise  a  state  is  at  the  mercy  of  other  states  for  a 
part  of  its  economic  existence,  and  in  case  of  war  may  find  itself 
seriously  handicapped. 

On  the  other  hand,  those  who  favor  free  trade  reply  that  in 
foreign  trade  states  are  not  rivals,  but  customers ;  and  that  if  im- 
ports are  restricted  by  high  duties,  exports  must  be  correspondingly 
diminished.  If  trade  is  unhindered,  every  one  may  buy  in  the 
lowest  and  sell  in  the  highest  market.  Each  nation  may  thus 
develop  its  natural  resources  to  the  greatest  degree,  and  the  pro- 
duction and  wealth  of  the  world  will  be  accordingly  increased. 
They  claim  that  protection  is  an  unnecessary  tax  on  the  consumer 
and  interferes  with  the  adjustment  of  economic  forces ;  that  while 
protecting  some  industries  it  destroys  others ;  that  it  involves  large- 
scale  political  corruption  and  stirs  up  national  rivalries  and 
hatreds.1 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  remembered  that  free  trade  is  a 
cosmopolitan  ideal,  and,  while  augmenting  the  wealth  of  the  world 

1  Seligman,  Principles  of  Economics,  p.  511. 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT 


407 


as  a  whole,  might  be  injurious  to  states  with  poor  economic 
resources,  whose  capital  and  labor  would  be  attracted  to  states 
offering  greater  advantages.  In  the  present  age  of  national  rival- 
ries states  are  not  unselfish  enough  to  increase  general  welfare  at 
the  expense  of  their  own  existence,  and  states  whose  resources  or 
industrial  methods  are  inferior  or  undeveloped  will  probably  try 
to  balance  such  handicaps  by  protective  tariffs.  At  present  Great 
Britain  is  the  only  industrial  state  on  a  free-trade  basis.  Even 
her  colonies,  while  establishing  preferential  rates  with  the  home 
state,  have  adopted  the  principle  of  protection,  and  Japanese  and 
American  competition  may  compel  Great  Britain  to  modify  her 
present  system.  On  the  other  hand,  the  United  States,  whose 
resources  have  been  developed  more  rapidly  because  of  protection, 
has  reached  a  position  of  industrial  supremacy  comparable  to  that 
of  England  a  century  ago,  and  a  considerable  reduction  of  import 
duties  would  probably  be  to  her  advantage. 

3.  Regulation  of  labor.  In  the  present  industrial  era  the  rights, 
duties,  and  privileges  of  a  growing  laboring  class  must  be  readjusted 
to  accord  with  existing  conditions.  Legislation  for  this  purpose 
began  in  England,  where  the  evils  of  the  laissez-faire  principle 
as  applied  to  new  industrial  conditions  were  first  apparent.  In 
the  remainder  of  Europe  and  in  America  it  came  later,  but  is 
gradually  expanding.  Considerable  diversity  in  labor  legislation  is 
found  in  the  United  States,  since  such  regulation  comes  under 
commonwealth  and  not  federal  jurisdiction,  and  varies  in  accord- 
ance with  the  industrial  development  of  the  various  sections  of 
the  country. 

Legislation  in  behalf  of  the  laborer  has  assumed  three  principal 
forms,  dealing  with : x 

(a)  Conditions  of  employment.    Such  regulations  fix  an  age  limit 
below  which  children  may  not  be  employed,  limit  the  hours  of 
labor,   and  protect  laborers  against  accident  or  disease  due  to 
dangerous  or  unhealthy  trades. 

(b)  Conditions  of  remuneration.    Laws  have  been  passed  com- 
pelling regular  and  frequent  payment  of  wages  in  cash;  and  in 
Australia  minimum  wages  have  been  fixed  in  many  trades. 

1  Seligman,  Principles  of  Economics,  pp.  430-434. 


408          INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

(c)  Results  of  employment.  Under  this  head  the  most  important 
action  of  states  deals  with  employers'  liability  for  injuries  sustained 
by  workmen,  and  compulsory  insurance  of  laborers  against  acci- 
dent, illness,  and  old  age,  —  the  cost  being  divided  among  the 
employer,  the  government,  and  the  workmen.  In  New  Zealand 
and  parts  of  Australia  compulsory  arbitration  of  labor  disputes  is 
enforced. 

States  differ  in  the  degree  to  which  they  interfere  for  the  bene- 
fit of  laborers.  The  regulation  of  hours  of  employment,  limited 
at  first  to  women  and  children,  has  now  been  extended  to  men  in 
certain  occupations  by  all  industrial  states.  The  legal  principles 
of  "  implied  risk  "  and  "  fellow  servant "  limit  the  liability  of  em- 
ployers in  the  United  States  far  more  than  is  the  case  in  most 
states.  Compulsory  insurance,  starting  in  Germany  and  imitated 
in  many  states,  has  met  with  little  favor  in  the  United  States, 
and  few  states  follow  Australasia  in  fixing  a  minimum  wage  or 
applying  compulsory  arbitration  to  labor  disputes. 

4.  Education.    Most  states  regulate  education,  encourage  it  by 
granting  subsidies,  or  undertake  its  management  as  a  public  func- 
tion.   Public  education  is  desirable,  not  only  for  the  welfare  of  indi- 
viduals, but  also  for  the  safety  and  progress  of  the  state.    Education 
decreases  crime  and  poverty,  it  equips  men  for  the  various  trades 
and  professions  by  which  the  resources  and  interests  of  the  state 
may  be  utilized  or  conserved,  and  it  makes  citizens  capable  of 
taking  an  intelligent  part  in  public  affairs. 

5.  Care  of  the  poor  and  incapable.    In  this  function  the  state 
supplements  the  activities  of  private  individuals  and  of  religious 
institutions.    It  makes  provision,  usually  through  its  local  divisions, 
for  the  care  of  the  destitute,  especially  aged  persons  and  children. 
It  maintains  reform  schools,  institutes  for  defectives,  hospitals, 
and  asylums.     By  these  means  needy  individuals  are  aided  and 
the  welfare  of  society  safeguarded. 

6.  Sanitation  and  health.    To  counteract  the  ignorance  or  self- 
ishness of  individuals,  states  take  precautions  against  the  rise  and 
spread  of  disease.    In  this  way  they  not  only  assist  those  directly 
concerned,  but  also  protect  society  in  general.   Besides,  the  interests 
of  the  state,  as  well  as  the  happiness  and  prosperity  of  individuals, 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  GOVERNMENT 


409 


are  concerned  in  preventing  pauperism  and  crime  and  in  increasing 
the  effective  labor  power  of  its  citizens.  The  regulation  and  inspec- 
tion of  foodstuffs  are  additional  safeguards,  and  by  restrictions  on 
the  manufacture  and  sale  of  alcoholic  products  the  state  aims  to 
improve  moral  and  social  conditions  as  well  as  public  health. 

In  addition,  there  are  numerous  other  functions  that  states 
undertake,  or  regulations  that  they  enforce,  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
tecting individuals  or  promoting  general  welfare.  State  regulation 
of  the  practice  of  law,  medicine,  and  pharmacy,  the  inspection  of 
buildings,  restrictions  on  public  gambling,  and  Sabbath-observance 
laws  are  a  few  examples  that  show  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  any 
attempt  to  draw  a  definite  line  separating  activities  of  private  con- 
cern from  those  that,  in  the  opinion  of  modern  states,  have  a  social 
significance  sufficient  to  demand  public  action. 


INDEX 


Accretion,  149 

Achaean  league,  182 

Act  of  Settlement,  192 

Activities  of  the  state,  379-381 

Adjournment  of  legislatures,  249-250 

Administration,  as  a  part  of  govern- 
ment, 1 3  ;  law  of,  1 29  ;  Delation  to 
legislation,  231-234;  separate  law 
and  courts  for,  278-280 

Administrative  courts,  226,  274,  278- 
280 

Administrative  law,  129 

Admiralty  courts,  138 

Advantages,  of  religion  in  early  states, 
45-46  ;  of  federal  government,  187  ; 
of  special  method  of  constitutional 
amendment,  198-199  ;  of  direct  legis- 
lation, 215;  of  administrative  cen- 
tralization, 232-233 ;  of  bicameral 
legislatures,  239 ;  of  hereditary  ex- 
ecutives, 258 ;  of  political  parties, 
309 ;  of  commission  government  in 
cities,  339 ;  of  socialism,  385-386 

Age,  for  suffrage,  208 

Aix-la-Chapelle,  Congress  of,  153—" 

Alaska,  369 

Aldermen,  in  England,  326 

Algeria,  241,  243,  363 

Alien  and  Sedition  acts,  295 

Aliens,  151 

Alsace-Lorraine,  319,  320 

Alternat,  147,  154 

Althusius,  J.,  political  theory  of,  83 

Amendment  of  constitutions,  185-186, 
198-202 

American  Revolution,  99,  104,  106, 
107,  362 

Amos,  S.,  on  characteristics  of  city 
state,  75  ;  on  revolution,  105  ;  on  the 
bicameral  system,  239 

Anarchism,  380 

Ancestor  worship,  44,  45 

Anciennete,  171 

Antifederalists,  295 

Aquinas,  Thomas,  political  theory  of, 
77 


Arbitration,  international,  as  a  source 
of  international  law,  138  ;  in  settling 
disputes,  155-156;  compulsory,  in 
labor  disputes,  408 

Aristocracy,  168 

Aristotle,  on  population,  1 1  ;  political 
theory  of,  75;  on  international  rela- 
tions, 134;  on  separation  of  powers, 
223 

Armies,  in  modern  states,  401 

Arrondissements,  243,  322,  323 

Assembly  of  legislatures,  249-250 

Assize  towns,  284 

Aucoc,  C.,  on  functions  of  the  execu- 
tive, 270 

Austin,  J.,  79;  on  sovereignty,  97;  on 
law,  127 

Australia,  labor  legislation  in,  407,  408 

Austria,  birth  and  death  rates  in,  30 ; 
density  of  population  in,  32  ;  relation 
to  Hungary,  181  ;  socialism  in,  389 

Balance  of  power,  147 

Belgium,  neutralization  of,  139;  voting 

—  in,  218;  socialism  in,  389 

Belligerent,  156 

Bentham,  J.,  political  theory  of,  80 

Bering  Sea  controversy,  150 

Berlin,  representation  in  Reichstag,  243- 
244 

Berlin  Conference,  371 

Bicameral  system,  238-239 

Bill  of  Rights,  192 

Birth  rate,  30-31 

Blackstone,  Sir  \V.,  on  law,  122,  127; 
on  separation  of  powers,  224 

Blockade,  163-165 

Bluntschli,  J.  K.,  on  definition  of  politi- 
cal science,  14  ;  on  forces  creating 
nationality,  34-35  ;  on  organic  theory, 
89;  on  local-government  areas,  316; 
on  the  aims  of  the  state,  377,  378 

Bodin,  J.,  political  theory  of,  78 ;  on 
sovereignty,  96 ;  on  separation  of 
powers,  224 

Boer  War,  354 


411 


412 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


"Boss,"   the,    299,  310;  in   socialistic 

state,  387 

Boundaries,   natural,    19-22 ;    in    inter- 
national law,   148 
Bourbons,  303 
Bremen,  320 
Breviary  of  Alaric,  124 
British  North  Borneo  Company,  372 
British  South  Africa  Company,  139 
Brussels  Conference,  138,  157,  371 
Bryce,  James,  on  patriotism,  312 
Buckle,   H.  T.,  on  aspects  of  nature, 

25 

Budget,  crisis  over,  in  England,  294 
Building,  regulations  concerning,  341 
Bundesraih,  241,  262-263 
Bureaucracy,  232-234,  324 
Bureaux,  in  French  legislature,  247 
Burgess,  J.  W.,  on  political  ability  of 
nations,  35-37  ;    on  geographic  and 
ethnic  unity,  38-39  ;  on  the  origin  of 
the  state,  49 ;    on  civil  liberty,  115; 
on  classification  of  states,  168;    on 
forms  of  government,  170,  172;    on 
hereditary  executive,  258  ;  on  residu- 
ary powers,  271  ;  on  the  ends  of  the 
state,  378-379 
Burgomaster,  320 
Bynkershoek,  C.  van,  137 

Cabinet,  in  England,  262,  264 ;  in 
France,  264-265;  in  the  United 
States,  266 ;  functions  of  the,  267- 
269;  responsibility  to  Parliament, 
300-301 

Caesar,  19,  38 

Calvin,  John,  political  theory  of,  78 

Canon  law,  124,  125 

Cantons,  in  France,  316,  323;  in  Swit- 
zerland, 319 

Capetians,  63 

Capital,  as  an  influence  in  colonial  de- 
velopment, 357-385 ;  relation  to  labor 
in  socialism,  386 

Capitulation,  160 

Cartel,  160 

Carthage,  351 

Casa  de  Contractacion,  359 

Cassation  Court,  284 

Caucus,  306,  310 

Cavaliers,  293 

Celts,  36 

Center,  the,  in  Germany,  305 

Central  Offices,  in  England,  306 

Centralization  in  France,  322 

Cession  of  territory,  149 

Chamber  of  Deputies,  243;  control 
over  ministry,  264-265 


Chancellor,  the,  in  Germany,  246,  250, 
265 

Chancery  courts,  in  England,  283,  284 

Charities,  341,  408 

Charlemagne,  19,  61 

Charles  V  of  Spain,  62 

Charters,  as  forerunners  of  constitu- 
tions, 196;  municipal,  334;  public- 
utility,  342-344 

China,  influence  of  nature  on,  19,  24 ; 
density  of  population  in,  32  ;  spheres 
of  influence  in,  356,  371 

Church,  the,  in  feudalism,  61  ;  political 
theory  of,  76-77,  80;  law  of,  125; 
separation  from  state,  401-402 

Church  of  England,  301 

Cicero,  political  theory  of,  76 

Circles  in 'Prussia,  324-325 

Cities,  historical  development  of,  329- 
3335  government  of,  333-338;  re- 
form of,  in  the  United  States,  338- 
340 ;  activities  of,  340-344 

Citizenship,  209 

City  state,  Greek,  55-57 ;  political 
theory  of,  74-75  ;  as  a  type  of  state, 
167  ;  as  a  form  of  municipal  govern- 
ment, 333 

Civil  liberty,  1 1  i-i  1 5,  205 

Civil  Rights  Case,  283 

Civil  service,  267-269 ;  reform  of,  309 

Civil  Service  Act,  269 

Clay,  Henry,  296 

Climate,  22-23 

Coalition,  ministries  formed  by,  in 
France,  302,  303 

Code  Napoleon,  125 

Colonia,  351,  359 

Colonial  office,  in  England,  374 

Colonies,  importance  of,  347-350;  defi- 
nition of,  351  ;  development  of,  351- 


355;  motives  for  establishing,  355- 
358  ;  policy  regarding,  359-363  ;  Eng- 
lish, 363-366;  United  States,  366- 


371  ;  forms  of  governing,  371-374 

Combatants  and  noncombatants,  167 

Commerce,  influence  on  city  life,  331  ; 
influence  on  colonial  development, 
348,  356-357  ;  interstate,  404-405 

Commission,  government  by,  339- 
340 

Committees,  in  legislatures,  247-248 ; 
in  political  parties,  306-307 

Common  law,  128 

Commonwealths,  in  the  United  States, 
286-287,  318,  320-321;  in  Switzer- 
land, 318-319;  in  Germany,  319-320 

Communes,  in  France,  316,  322,  323; 
in  Prussia,  316,324,  325 


INDEX 


413 


Communication,  influence  on  progress, 
27 ;  influence  on  colonial  develop- 
ment, 357 

Companies,  chartered,  as  methods  of 
establishing  colonies,  360,  372-373 

Concert  of  powers,  141,  148 

Concurrent  jurisdiction,  185-186,  287 

Confederation,  in  international  law, 
139  ;  as  a  form  of  government,  172- 
173  ;  as  a  union  of  states,  181 

Conquest  of  territory,  149 

Conservatives,  294,  301,  306 

Consolato  del  Mare,  135,  162 

Constituent  Assembly,  322 

Constitutional  law,  128,  129,  192-193; 
in  France,  194,  197 

Constitutions,  nature  of,  113;  written 
and  unwritten,  191-193 ;  requisites 
of,  193-195 ;  creation  of,  195-198 ; 
amendment  of,  198-202 

Consular  courts,  1 52 

Consuls,  153-154 

Contempt  of  court,  278 

Continuous  voyage,  doctrine  of,  164 

Contour,  geographic,  19-22 

Contraband,  163 

Convention,  as  a  form  of  party  organi- 
zation, 306,  307,  308,  310 

Convoy,  164 

Copyright,  404 

Corporations,  127;  as  parties  to  inter- 
national law,  139;  cities  as,  334; 
public-utility,  342-344 ;  government 
regulation  of,  404 ;  quasi-public,  405 

Council  of  State,  in  France,  262,  267, 
284 

Council  of  the  Dutch  Indies,  373 

Councils,  executive,  261-263 ;   munici- 

Pal>  335>  336-337,  339 

County,  in  England,  316,  325,  326;  in 
the  United  States,  316,  328-329 

Courts,  admiralty,  138;  consular,  152; 
prize,  159,  165;  administrative,  226, 
274,  278-280 ;  in  creating  law,  276 ; 
in  declaring  laws  unconstitutional, 
281-283;  chancery,  283,  284;  of 
Cassation,  284;  of  Claims,  286;  of 
Private  Land  Claims,  286 

Courts-martial,  274,  277 

Crane,  R.  T.,  on  the  nature  of  sover- 
eignty, 90 

Criminal  law,  129-130 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  106 

Crusades,  62,  352 

Cumulative  voting,  217 

Curia  Regis,  261 

Custom,  in  early  states,  44,  48,  49,  50 ; 
as  a  source  of  law,  121 


Davis,  G.  B.,  on  three-mile  limit,  148-149 

Dealey,  J.  Q.,  on  government,  13,  14; 
on  the  electorate,  216;  on  functions 
of  legislatures,  252-253;  on  evolution 
of  executive,  256 ;  on  executive  func- 
tions, 269,  270;  on  evolution  of  the 
judiciary,  273  ;  on  regulation  of  po- 
litical parties,  308 ;  on  evolution  of 
taxation,  397 

Death  rate,  30-31 

Debt,    municipal,    342-343 ;     national, 

398-399 

Decentralization  in  United  States  com- 
monwealths, 320,  322 

Declaration  of  Independence,  85 

Declaration  of  war,  157 

Democracy,  growth  of,  63-64,  101  ; 
nature  of,  1 1 6-1 17;  as  a  type  of  state, 
168-169;  as  a  form  of  government, 
170;  as  influenced  by  federation,  186- 
187;  requisites  of,  205-206 ;  political 
parties  in,  289-290 

Democrats,  295-296 

Departments,  heads  of,  263-267 ;  in 
France,  316,  322-323 

Dependencies,  351 

Despotism,  170 

Diplomacy,  152-156;  correspondence 
of,  138 

Direct  nomination,  310,  336 

Disadvantages,  of  federal  government, 
187-188;  of  direct  legislation,  215; 
of  administrative  centralization,  232- 
233 ;  of  bicameral  legislatures,  239 ; 
of  political  parties,  308 ;  of  commis- 
sion government  in  cities,  339-340 ; 
of  socialism,  386-387 

Discrimination      in      railroad      rates, 

405 

Distribution  under  socialism,  385 

District  of  Columbia,  368 

Divine  theory,  46,  80-8 1 

Division  of  powers,  as  a  basis  of  classi- 
fying government,  171  ;  in  federa- 
tions, 184-186;  nature  of,  222;  dis* 
cussion  of,  230-234 ;  effect  on  politi- 
cal parties,  291-292,  299;  concerning 
cities,  340-341 

Divisions,  of  political  science,  14-15; 
of  local  government,  316,  321 

Domestic  system,  331 

Drago  Doctrine,  147 

Dred  Scott  Case,  282 

Dual  government,  172-173 

Dutch  East  India  Company,  360 

East  India  Company  of  England,  139' 
East  Indies,  353 


414 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


Economics,  relation  to  political  sci- 
ence, 5 

Education,  as  a  state  function,  341,  408 

Education  Act  in  England,  327 

Elections,  majority  required  in,  218; 
effect  on  political  parties,  290-291, 
298-299,  303  ;  in  cities,  335-336 

Electorate,  extent  of,  206-211  ;  control 
over  government,  211-212 

Electors,  presidential,  in  the  United 
States,  218,  298 

Elkins  Law,  405 

Embargo,  156 

Employers'  liability,  408 

Ends  of  the  state,  377-379 

England,  influence  of  nature  on,  19,  20, 
21,  24,  25;  birth  and  death  rates  in, 
30  ;  density  of  population  in,  32  ;  ab- 
solute monarchy  in,  63  ;  democracy 
in,  64 ;  legal  sovereignty  in,  102 ; 
civil  liberty  in,  1 13-1 14  ;  law  in,  125  ; 
form  of  government  in,  175-176; 
upper  house  in,  240-241 ;  lower  house 
in,  243  ;  executive  head  in,  258-261  ; 
executive  council  in,  261-262  ;  cabi- 
net in,  264 ;  judiciary  in,  283-284  ; 
political  parties  in,  293—294,  300—302, 
305-306;  local  government  in,  325- 
327  ;  city  government  in,  336-338 ; 
colonies  of,  350,  353-354,  361-366; 
socialism  in,  389-390 ;  finance  in, 

399 

Environment,  physical,  importance  of, 
17-18;  elements  of,  18  ;  changed  by 
human  effort,  25-27 ;  influence  on 
population,  31-33;  influence  on  Ori- 
ent, 54  ;  influence  on  Greek  city  state, 
55-56;  influence  on  Roman  Empire, 

57.  58 

Equity,  122,  123 

Era  of  good  feeling,  295 

Erfurt  Congress,  388 

Ethics,  relation  to  political  science, 
5-6;  relation  to  law,  130-131 

Euphrates,  valley  of  the,  19,  21,  24,  54 

Ex  post  facto  law,  200 

Exclusion  Bill,  293 

Executive,  the,  evolution  of,  255-256; 
composition  of,  257  ;  head  of,  257- 
261  ;  councils,  261-263  ;  heads  of  de- 
partments, 263-267 ;  civil  service, 
267-269;  functions  of,  269-271;  re- 
lation to  judiciary,  277-280 ;  in  cities, 
337-338 

Executive  councils,  261-263 

Expenditures,  in  modern  states,  398- 
399  ;  adjustment  to  revenue,  400 

Exterritoriality,  153 


Extradition,  152 

Extralegal,  political  parties  as,  298-299, 
308,  310 

Fabian  Society,  389 

Factions,  292 

Fairlie,  J.  A.,  on  urban  population,  332 

Family,  in  state  origin,  33,  42-44  ;  sepa- 
ration of  state  and,  401-402 

Family  of  nations,  140 

"  Favorite  sons,"  307 

Federalists,  295 

Federation,  nature  of,  172-173,  181- 
184 ;  distribution  of  powers  in,  184- 
186,  230-231  ;  advantages  and  disad- 
vantages of,  186-189 

Fellow  servant,  legal  principle  of,  408 

Feudalism,  44 ;  as  a  type  of  state,  59- 
61  ;  influence  on  sovereignty,  96 

Filmer,  Sir  R.,  political  theory  of,  81 

Finance,  municipal,  342-343  ;  evolution 
of,  397-398;  in  modern  states,  398- 
399  ;  systems  of,  400 

Fletcher  v.  Peck,  282 

Foreign  Office,  in  Germany,  374 ;  in 
England,  374 

France,  influence  of  nature  on,  20,  25  ; 
birth  and  death  rates  in,  31  ;  density 
of  population  in,  32  ;  absolute  mon- 
archy in,  63 ;  democracy  in,  64 ; 
origin  of  sovereignty  in,  96;  legal 
sovereignty  in,  102 ;  civil  liberty  in, 
113;  form  of  government  in,  175- 
176;  upper  house  in,  241;  lower 
house  in,  243 ;  executive  head  in, 
258-261;  executive  council  in,  262; 
cabinet  in,  264-265 ;  judiciary  in, 
284-285  ;  political  parties  in,  302- 
304,  30.5 ;  local  government  in,  322- 
323 ;  city  government  in,  336-338 ; 
colonies  of,  350,  353-354,  360-361  ; 
socialism  in,  389  ;  finance  in,  398 

Franchises,  342-344 

Franco-Prussian  War,  197 

Free  silver,  300 

Free  trade,  in  England,  362  ;  arguments 
for,  406-407 

French  Marine  Ordinance,  138 

French  Revolution,  64,  79,  99,  105,  125, 
207,  302,  316 

Functions,  of  legislatures,  252-253;  of 
cabinets,  266-267 ;  of  executives,  269- 
271;  of  judiciary,  275-276;  of  politi- 
cal parties,  289-292  ;  of  central  and 
local  governments,  3 1 6-3 1 7 ;  of  cities, 
340-344 ;  of  colonies,  349 ;  of  the 
state,  379-381 ;  of  government,  es- 
sential, 395,  396-401  ;  optional,  395, 


INDEX 


415 


401-409;  financial,  397-400 ;  military, 
400-401 
Fundamental  Orders  of  Connecticut,  196 

Garner,  J.  W.,  on  judiciary  in  the  United 
States,  286 

General  welfare  as  a  theory  of  state 
activity,  381 

General  Workingmen's  Association,  388 

Geneva  Convention,  138,  158 

Gens,  42 

George  III  of  England,  294 

German  East  Africa  Company,  139 

Germany,  influence  of  nature  on,  20 ; 
birth  and  death  rates  in,  30 ;  density 
of  population  in,  32 ;  delayed  unity 
in,  63 ;  legal  sovereignty  in,  102,; 
civil  liberty  in,  113-114;  form  of  gov- 
ernment in,  175-176;  powers  of  fed- 
eral government  in,  184;  upper  house 
in,  241;  lower  house  in,  243-244; 
executive  head  in,  258-261  ;  execu- 
tive council  in,  262-263  ;  judiciary  in, 
285;  political  parties  in,  304-305; 
commonwealth  government  in,  319- 
320;  local  government  in,  323-325; 
city  government  in,  336-338 ;  colo- 
nies of,  348,  355,  362;  socialism  in, 
388-389  ;  finance  in,  398-399 

Gerrymander,  216 

Goodnow,  F.  J.,  on  administrative  law, 
129;  on  separation  of  powers,  227, 
229,  230 ;  on  division  of  powers,  231 ; 
on  executive  councils,  261  ;  on  func- 
tions of  cabinets,  266 ;  on  political 
parties,  299 ;  on  municipal  govern- 
ment, 233,  234 

Government,  nature  of,  13,  14;  forms 
of,  170-177;  hereditary,  171,  176; 
elective,  171  ;  unitary,  172,  230;  dual, 
172-173,  230;  parliamentary,  173- 
174,226,260-261  ;  nonparliamentary, 
174-175,  227,  260-261  ;  control  of 
electorate  over,  211-212;  composi- 
tion of,  221-222  ;  of  local  areas,  318- 
329  ;  of  cities,  333-344  ;  of  colonies, 
371-374;  province  of,  377-391 ;  func- 
tions of,  393-409 

Government  regulation,  of  political 
parties,  308,  310;  of  public  utilities, 
342-344  ;  of  trade  and  industry,  403- 

404  ;  of  trusts,  404  ;  of  railroads,  404- 

405  ;  of  commerce,  405-407 ;  of  labor, 
407-408 

Governor,  powers  of,  in  United  States 
commonwealths,  270;  in  administra- 
tion, 320 

*  Graft,"  311,  338 


Grand  jury,  285 

Greece,  influence  of  nature  on,  19,  20, 

21,   24,  25;    political  ability  of,   36; 

city  state  in,  55-57  ;  political  theory 

of,  74-75,  80,  87  ;  cities  in,  330 
Grotius,  H.,  78  ;  on  sovereignty,  96-97  ; 

on  international  law,  136,  137 
Guam,  369 

Guerrillas,  in  warfare,  1 57 
Guilds,  331 

Hague  conferences,  147,  155-156,  159, 
162 

Hall,  W.  E.,  on  parties  to  international 
law,  139;  on  nature  of  international 
law,  141 

Haller,  L.  von,  political  theory  of,  79 

Hamburg,  320 

Hamilton,  Alexander,  295 

Hanover,  house  of,  294 

Hawaii,  368,  369 

Heads  of  administration,  257-261 

Heads  of  departments,  263-267;  func- 
tions of,  267-269 

Hebrews,  political  theory  of,  74,  80, 83  ; 
contributions  to  law,  126 

High  Court  of  Justice,  in  England,  284 

Hillquit,  M.,  on  present  socialism,  388 

Historical  School,  120 

History,   relation   to  political  science, 

4,  5 

Hobbes,  T.,  political  theory  of,  83-84 
Holland,  colonies  of,  353,  360,  362 
Holland,   T.    E.,  on   territory,   1 1  ;    on 

definition  of  law,  119;  on  nature  of 

law,  120;  on  rights,  127 
Holmes  v.  Walton,  282 
Holtzendorff,  F.  von,  on  the  ends  of  the 

state,  378 

Holy  Roman  Empire,  63,  135,  136 
Home  rule  for  Ireland,  302 
Hooker,  R.,  political  theory  of,  83 
House  of  Commons,  243  ;  control  over 

cabinet,  264 
House    of    Lords,    240-241  ;    judicial 

powers  of,  280 

House  of  Representatives,  244 
Humboldt,  W.  von,  on  individualism, 

382 

Hundreds  in  England,  316,  325 
Hungary,  birth  and  death  rates  in,  31  ; 

relation  to  Austria,  181 

Immigration,  348 

Impeachment,  260,  278,  281 

Imperial  federation,  177,  189,349,365- 

366,  374 
Imperial  Federation  League,  366 


416 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


Implied  powers,  186,  199 

Implied  risk,  legal  principle  of,  408 

Income  Tax  Case,  283 

Independence,  13,  95,  146 

India,  363-364 

Individual,  importance  of,  37-38 ;  in 
international  law,  140 ;  relation  to  the 
state,  377-379 

Individual  liberty,  see  Liberty 

Individualism,  380,  381-385;  tendency 
away  from,  394 

Industrial  Revolution,  334,  383,  405 

Industry,  state  management  of,  402- 
403 ;  state  regulation  of,  403-407 

Initiative,  the,  213-216,  319,  336 

Injunction,  writs  of,  278 

Instruction  of  representatives,  250 

Instructions  for  the  Guidance  of  the 
Armies  of  the  United  States,  138 

"  Instrument  of  Government,"  in  Eng- 
land, 196 

Insular  Cases,  283,  350 

Insurance,  compulsory,  of  laborers,  408 

International,  the,  390-391 

International  Administrative  Unions, 
1 80 

International  arbitration,  as  a  source  of 
international  law,  138  ;  in  settling  dis- 
putes, 155-156 

International  Kongo  Association,  372 

International  law,  nature  of,  128,  130, 
133,  141-142;  history  of,  134-136; 
sources  of,  137-139;  parties  to,  139- 
141;  content  of,  145-165;  divisions 
of,  145-146 

International  Prize  Court,  156,  159 

International  .relations,  133;  history  of, 
134-136;  as  affected  by  colonies, 

348-349 

International  Socialist  Bureau,  391 

Interpellation,  265,  303 

Interstate  commerce  in  the  United 
States,  404,  405 

Interstate  Commerce  Act,  405 

Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  405 

Intervention,  146-147 

Irish  Nationalists,  302,  306 

Irreconcilables,  293,  303 

Issues,  political,  290-291,  300-305 

Italy,  influence  of  nature  on,  19 ;  birth 
and  death  rates  in,  31  ;  density  of 
population  in,  32 ;  delayed  unity  in, 
63;  socialism  in,  389;  railroads  in, 
396 


Jackson,  Andrew,  295 

Jacobites,  293 

James  I,  political  theory  of,  81 


Japan,  birth  and  death  rates  in,  30  •, 
density  of  population  in,  32 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  political  theory  of, 
85  ;  leader  of  Republicans,  295 

Jenks,  E.,  on  patriarchal  society,  43-44 

Jesuits,  352,  356,  359 

Judges,  qualifications  of,  276 

Judiciary,  evolution  of,  273-275;  func- 
tions of,  275-276;  requisites  of,  276- 
277  ;  relation  to  executive,  277-280 ; 
relation  to  legislature,  280-283 ;  or- 
ganization of,  283-287 

Juge  d' instruction,  285 

Juries,  216,  284,  285,  286 

Jurisconsults,  122 

Jurisdiction,  151-152 

Jurisprudence,  relation  to  Apolitical  sci- 
•  ence,  6 

Jus  feciale,  134 

Jus  gentium,  134,  136,  137 

Justices  of  the  peace,  284,  325,  326 

Kinship,  as  a  force  in  state-building,  42- 

44 

Know-Nothing  party,  296' 
Kreise,  316,  324 

Labor,  government  regulation  of,  407- 
408 

Labor  party,  in  the  United  States,  296, 
300,  390 ;  in  England,  302,  390 

Laissez  faire,  382,  407 

Landesdirector,  324 

Landesgemeinde,  213,214 

Landrath,  325 

Language,  influence  on  nationality,  34 

Lassalle,  F.,  388 

Law,  relation  to  sovereignty,  13;  £ri-. 
vate,  112,  123,  126,  128-130*;  public, 
112,  123,  126,  128-130;  nature  of, 
119-121;  positive,  119;  sources  of, 
121-123;  basis  of,  123-126;  canon, 
124, 125  ;  adjective,  127  ;  substantive, 
127;  common,  128;  administrative, 
129;  divisions  of,  128-130;  constitu- 
tional, 128,  129,  192-193;  criminal, 
129-130;  municipal,  130,  138;  rela- 
tion to  ethics,  130-131  ;  relation  to 
international  law,  141  ;  constitutional 
and  statute,  192-193;  equality  before 
the,  275  ;  created  by  courts,  275-276 

Lawrence,  T.  J.,  on  history  of  interna- 
tional law,  134;  on  parties  to  inter- 
national law,  139;  on  divisions  of 
international  law,  146;  enspheres  of 
influence,  1 50 ;  on  extradition,  i  C2  : 
on  neutrality,  160;  on  duties  of  neu- 
trals and  belligerents,  161 


INDEX 


417 


Lawyers,  importance  of,  in  the  United 
States,  219,  283 

Leacock,  S.,  on  theory  of  sovereignty, 
97;  on  forms  of  government,  170; 
on  weakness  of  federal  government, 
188;  on  individualism,  381,  385 

Legal  sovereignty,  101 

Legal  Tender  Case,  283 

Legislation,  as  a  source  of  law,  122-123  ; 
method  of  procedure,  249-252;  sys- 
tems of  formulating,  252 

Legislature,  relation  to  executive,  226- 
227,  260-261  ;  structure  of,  237- 
239;  upper  houses,  240-242;  lower 
houses,  242-244  ;  comparative  power 
of  houses,  244-246;  internal  organ- 
ization of,  246-249 ;  procedure  of, 
249-252  ;  functions  of,  252-253  ;  re- 
lation to  judiciary,  280-283 

Levy  en  masse,  1 58 

Liberals,  294,  301,  306 

Liberty,  begun  in  Greece,  57  ;  among 
the  Teutons,  60 ;  in  national  state, 
63-64 ;  compromise  with  sovereignty, 
66-67  ;  nature  of,  109-1 1 2 ;  ciyiL  1 1 1- 
115,  205 ;  national,  in;  "political, 
1 1 2, 1 1 5-1 1 7,  205  ;  guarantee  ofTl  1 2- 
114;  content  of,  114-115;  as  affect- 
ing governmental  functions,  395 

Limited  voting,  217 

Local  government,  relation  to  central 
government,  231-233, 321-322  ;  areas 
of,  316, 321;  in  commonwealths,  318- 
321;  in  rural  areas,  321-329;  in  cities, 

333-344 
Local  Government  Acts  in  England, 

326 

Locke,  John,  political  theory  of,  83,  85 
London,  318,  327 

London  Naval  Conference,  159,  163 
Lord  chancellor,  in  England,  246,  280, 

284,  326 

Lord  chief  justice,  in  England,  284 
Lord  lieutenant,  in  English  counties, 

326 

Lords  of  Appeals,  280 
Lotteries,  403 
Louis  XIV  of  France,  62 
Lowell,  A.  L.,  on  election  of  president 

in  the  United  States,  298 ;  on  party 

government   in    England,    301  ;    on 

party  subdivision  in  France,  302  ;  on 

party  subdivision  in  Germany,  304 ; 

on  absence  of  local  self-government 

in  France,  322 
Lower    houses    of    legislatures,    242- 

244 
Liibeck,  318,  320 


Machiavelli,  political  theory  of,  77 

"Machine,"  the,  in  party  organization, 
310 

Macy,  J.,  on  political  parties,  289 

Madison,  James,  political  theory  of,  85 

Magna  Charta,  192,  195 

Maine,  Sir  H.,  79 ;  on  theory  of  sover- 
eignty, 97 

Majority,  nature  of,  169;  required  for 
election,  218 

Mandamus,  writs  of,  278 

"  Manifest  destiny,"  362 

Manifesto,  154 

Manors,  in  Prussia,  325 

Marbury  v.  Madison,  282 

Marshall,  John,  277 

Marx,  Karl,  on  economic  basis  of  social- 
ism, 386 

Massachusetts  Bay  Company,  361 

Mayflower  compact,  86,  196 

Mayor,  323,  337~338>  339 

Mercantile  Theory,  361,  405 

Merriam,  C.  E.,  on  the  nature  of  sover- 
eignty, 91  ;  on  individualism,  382 

Mexico,  23,  24,  54  ;  president  of,  258 

Middle  Ages,  feudalism  in,  59-61  ;  sov- 
ereignty in,  95-96;  liberty  in,  115; 
international  relations  in,  135;  cities 
in,  331;  colonies  in, 351-352;  colonial 
policy  in,  359;  taxation  in,  398 

Migration,  21-22,  31-32,  350 

Missionaries  in  colonization,  356 

Monarchial  unions,  180-181 

Monarchy,  62,  168 

Monopcmesrstate,  398  ;  fiscal,  402-403  ; 
social,  403 ;  government  regulation 
of,  404 

Monroe  Doctrine,  141,  148 

Montesquieu,  on  separation  of  powers, 
224,  279 

Morality,  political,  311-312 

"  Most-favored-nation  "  clause,  in  trea- 
ties, 154 

Municipal  government,  333-338 

Municipal  law,  130,  138 

Municipal  ownership,  342-343 

Napoleon,  19,  38,  64,  106,  197,  322,  353 
Nation,  meaning  of,  9 ;  political  ability 

°f>  35-37 

National  Conservative  Union,  306 
National    convention    in    the    United 

States,  307 

National  imperialism,  347 
National  Liberal  Federation,  306 
National  liberty,  see  Liberty 
National  Municipal  League,  339 
National  state,  61-65,  167 


4i8 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


Nationality,  meaning  of,  9,  10;  causes 

of,  34 

Natural  law,  81-82,  87 

Natural  rights,  82,  86-87,  IIO»  3&2 

Naturalization,  151,  209 

Nature  worship,  44-45 

Navigation  Acts,  361 

Navy,  349 ;  influence  on  colonial  em- 
pires, 352,  353,  354;  in  modern 
states,  401 

Negro  suffrage,  209,  210 

Neutral  commerce,  162-165 

Neutrality,  160-162 

Neutralization,  139,  160 

Nevada,  318 

New  World,  352 

New  York  City,  318 

New  Zealand,  208 

Nile,  valley  of  the,  19,  21,  24,  54 

Nominations,  306-308,  310;  direct,  310, 
336;  in  cities,  335-336;  by  petition, 

336 

Nonconformists,  301 

Nonparliamentary  government,  see  Gov- 
ernment 

North  German  Confederation,  198 

Northwest  Ordinance,  367 

Oberprasident,  324 

Occupation  of  territory,  149 

Opportunists,  389 

Opposition  in  England,  300-301 

Ordinances,  128,  267 

Organic  Act,  for  Porto  Rico,  369 ;  for 
the  Philippines,  370 

Organic  laws  in  France,  194,  197 

Organic  theory,  87-89 

Organization,  essential  to  the  state,  12  ; 
of  political  parties,  305-308 

Orient,  empires  in  the,  54-55 ;  sover- 
eignty in,  97 

Pacific  blockade,  156 

Panama  Canal,  150 

Panama  Canal  zone,  369 

Pardon,  power  of,  274,  278 

Paris,  Treaty  of,  137,  138;  Declaration 
of,  158,  162 

Parish,  325,  326 

Parlements  in  France,  279 

Parliamentary  government,  see  Govern- 
ment 

Party,  government  by,  289-292,  297-305 

Patriarchal  family,  42-44 

Patriotism,  312 

Patriots,  294 

Pay  of  members,  248 

Persia,  55 


Persona  non  grata,  1 53 

Personalunion,  181 

Peru,  23,  24,  54 

Philippines,  370-371 

Phoenicians,  351 

Pirates,  140,  151 

Plato,  political  theory  of,  75,  83 

Plebiscite,  213 

Police,  341 

Political  liberty,  see  Liberty 

Political  parties,  control  of,  over  gov- 
ernment, 212  ;  functions  of,  289-292  ; 
history  of,  292-297  ;  in  modern  states, 
297-305;  organization  of,  305-308; 
reform  of,  308-312;  as  affected  by 
colonies,  350 

Political  science,  nature  of,  3,  4;  divi- 
sions of,  4,  14,  15;  relation  to  sociol- 
ogy, 4 ;  to  history,  4-5 ;  to  econom- 
ics, 5;  to  ethics,  5-6;  to  jurispru- 
dence, 6 

Political  sovereignty,  see  Sovereignty 

Political  theory,  as  a  division  of  politi- 
cal science,  4  ;  importance  of,  71-73  ; 
ancient,  73-76;  medieval,  76-77; 
modern,  77-79  ;  force,  79  ;  utilitarian, 
79-80;  divine,  80-8 1 ;  social-contract, 
81-87  ;  organic,  87-89  ;  present,  89- 
91  ;  of  sovereignty,  95-99;  of  sepa- 
ration of  powers,  223-224 

Politics,  as  a  motive  of  colonization,  358 

Polybius,  political  theory  of,  76;  on 
separation  of  powers,  223 

Pooling,  railroad,  405 

Poor-law  unions,  in  England,  326,  327 

Popular  sovereignty,  see  Sovereignty 

Population,  essential  to  state,  n,  12; 
importance  of,  29 ;  growth  of,  30-31  ; 
distribution  of,  31-32  ;  of  cities,  332  ; 
movements  of,  350,  355 

Porto  Rico,  369-370 

Portugal,  colonial  development  of,  352  ; 
colonial  policy  of,  359 

Positive  law,  119 

Possibilists  in  France,  389 

President,  in  France,  258-260,  265;  in 
the  United  States,  258-260 ;  effect  of 
election  of,  on  parties,  298-299 

Primary  election,  306 

Prime  minister,  in  England,  264 ;  in 
France,  265 

Primogeniture,  171 

Private  law,  see  Law 

Privateers,  158 

Privy  council,  261,  262,  264 

Prize  courts,  159,  165 

Procedure,  legal,  127,  275 

Progress,  49~5i 


INDEX 


419 


Prohibition  party  in  the  United  States, 

296,  300 
Property,  in  international  law,  148-150 ; 

in  war,  158-160,  162-165;  as  a  req- 
uisite for  suffrage,  209-210 
Protectorate,  in  international  law,  139, 

149;    in  colonial  government,  371- 

372 

Protocol,  154 
Prussia,  system  of  voting  in,  217-218; 

power  of,  in  German  Empire,  319; 

local  government  in,  324-325 
Public  health,  341,  408 
Public  Health  acts  in  England,  326 
Public  law,  see  Law 
Public  safety,  341 
Public  utilities,  342—344,  403 
Publicity,    in    legislative    bodies,    250; 

in  corporations,  404 
Punishment,  275 
Puritans,  126,  293 

Quorum,  250 

Race,  33 

Railroads,  government  regulation  of, 
404-405 

Ransom  contract,  159 

Realunion,  180-181 

Rebates,  railroad,  405 

Recall,  212,  336 

Referendum,  201,  213-216,  319,  336 

Reform,  of  civil  service,  269 ;  of  politi- 
cal parties,  308-312 

Reform  Acts,  207,  210,  326 

Reformation,  the,  political  theory  of, 
77-78,  8 1  ;  influence  on  international 
law,  134-135 

Regierung,  324 

Regierungsbenrke,  316,  324 

Regierungsprasident,  324 

Regulation,  government,  of  trusts,  404  ; 
of  railroads,  404-405  ;  of  trade,  405- 
407  ;  of  labor,  407-408 

Reichsgericht,  285 

Reichstag,  243-244 ;  control  over  min- 
isters, 266 

Reinsch,  P.  S.,  on  colonial  develop- 
ment, 347 ;  on  colonial  administra- 
tion, 349;  on  definition  of  colony, 
351 ;  on  motives  of  colonization,  355  ; 
on  forms  of  colonial  government, 
371  ;  on  spheres  of  influence,  371 

Religion,  influence  on  nationality,  34 ; 
as  a  force  in  state-building,  44-46 

Representation,  of  minorities,  216-219  ; 
proportional,  217;  of  districts,  216- 
217,  242 


Representatives  at  large,  244 

Reprisal,  156 

Republicans,  296 

Requisition,  159 

Residuary  powers,  271 

Resources,  mineral,  23  ;  vegetable,  24 ; 
animal,  24-25 

Retorsion,  156 

Revenue,  in  modern  states,  398-399 ; 
adjustment  of,  to  expenditures,  400 

Revolution,  nature  of,  104-107  ;  in  ori- 
gin of  states,  195-196;  of  1688,  85, 
105,  293;  of  1848,  197 

Rhodes,  maritime  code  of,  134 

Rights,  126-127 

Rome,  influence  of  nature  on,  20,  21  ; 
political  ability  of,  3^-37  ;  world  em- 
pire of,  57-59 ;  fusion  with  Teutons, 
59-60;  political  theory  of,  75-76, 
80 ;  influence  on  sovereignty,  96 ; 
legal  ideas  of,  124-126;  international 
law  in,  134-135'  J37  \  cities  of,  330- 

33 1 

Roundheads,  293 

Rousseau,  on  population,  1 1  ;  political 
theory  of,  85  ;  on  representative  gov- 
ernment, 213;  on  individualism,  382 

Rowe,  L.  S.,  on  municipal  control  of 
public  utilities,  343 

Rules,  parliamentary,  250-251 

Russia,  influence  of  nature  on,  19; 
birth  and  death  rates  in,  30 ;  density 
of  population  in,  32 ;  expansion  of, 
350'  357 

Samoa,  369 

Sanitation,  341,  408-409 

Schaffle,  A.,  on  organic  theory,  88 

Scrutin  d^arrondissement,  243 

Scrutin  de  liste,  243 

Seager,  H.  R.,  on  socialism,  386 

Search,  right  of,  164-165 

Sections  in  German  Reichstag,  247 

Selectmen,  327 

Seligman,  E.  R.  A.,  on  social  monopo- 
lies, 403  ;  on  the  tariff,  406 ;  on  labor 
legislation,  407 

Semites,  35 

Senate,  in  France,  241  ;  in  the  United 
States,  242,  263 

Separation  of  powers,  as  a  basis  of 
classifying  government,  172;  nature 
of,  222  ;  theory  of,  223-224  ;  in  mod- 
ern states,  224-227  ;  criticism  of,  227- 
230;  effect  on  political  parties,  291- 
292,  299 

Sherman  Antitrust  Law,  404,  405 

Short  ballot,  309 


42O 


INTRODUCTION  TO  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


Sidgwick,  H.,  on  amendment  of  con- 
stitutions, 200 

"  Slate,"  the,  310 

Slavs,  36 

Smith,  Adam,  382 

Social  contract,  80-87 

Social  Democratic  Federation,  389 

Social  Democrats  in  Germany,  388 

Socialism,  as  a  political  party,  296,  297, 
300,  302,  305 ;  as  a  theory  of  state, 
activity,  381  ;  nature  of,  385;  advan- 
tages and  disadvantages  of,  385-387  ; 
in  present  politics,  387-391 

Socialist  Labor  party,  390 

Sociology,  relation  to  political  science,  4 

Sound  dues,  150 

South  Africa,  349,  354,  356,  357,  358, 
365,  366,  373 

Sovereignty,  as  essence  of  the  state,  12, 
13;  developed  by  Rome,  59;  com- 
promise with  liberty,  66-67,  109-1 1 1  ; 
nature  of,  90-91,  93-95;  theory  of, 
95-97  ;  criticism  of  theory  of,  97-99 ; 
popular,  99-101 ;  location  of,  98-104  ; 
political,  101  ;  relocation  of,  105-107  ; 
de  facto,  106-107  ;  de  jure,  106-107  ; 
effect  of  union  of  states  on,  180- 
181 ;  in  federations,  183-184  ;  located 
by  constitutions,  194—195  ;  legal,  275  ; 
as  affecting  governmental  functions, 

395 

Spain,  influence  of  nature  on,  19,  20, 
21,  23 ;  birth  and  death  rates  in,  31  ; 
density  of  population  in,  32  ;  colonial 
government  of,  352,  359-360 

Spanish-American  War,  300,  352,  355, 
368 

Spanish  Armada,  353 

Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, 177,  247 

Spencer,  H.,  political  theory  of,  87-88  ; 
on  organic  theory,  89 ;  on  individ- 
ualism, 383 

Spheres  of  influence,  nature  of,  150; 
German,  in  South  America,  348,  355  ; 
capitalistic,  357-358 ;  created  by  po- 
litical motives,  358;  as  a  form  of 
colonial  government,  371 

Spoils  system,  269,  299,  310 

Staatenstaat,  1 80 

Stagnation,  49,  54 

State,  essential  elements  of,  10-13,  9°~ 
91 ;  physical  basis  of,  17-27  ;  size  of, 
19-20;  isolation  of,  20-21  ;  influence 
of  race  on,  33  ;  relation  of  geographic 
and  ethnic  unity  to,  38 ;  origin  of, 
41-51,  89-90;  emergence  of,  47-49; 
evolution  of,  53-68;  theories  of,  71- 


91;  functions  of,  91,  393-409;  rela- 
tion to  individual,  109-110;  relation 
to  other  states,  133-142;  forms  of, 
167-169;  as  affected  by  colonial  de- 
velopment, 347-350;  aims  of,  377- 
379;  activities  of,  379-381 

Statt 'halter,  320 

Statutes,  128 

Steering  Committee,  177 

Stuttgart  Congress,  391 

Subsidies,  ship,  404  ;  postal,  404 

Substantive  law,  see  Law 

Suez  Canal,  150,  160,  354,  357 

Suffrage,  development  of,  207  ;  restric- 
tions on,  208-211  ;  in  cities,  334-335 

Supreme  Court,  of  the  United  States,  in 
international  law,  138 ;  in  constitution- 
amending,  186,  199,  283;  in  declaring 
laws  unconstitutional,  282-283  ;  gen- 
eral nature  of,  285-287 

Switzerland,  influence  of  nature  on,  19  ; 
birth  and  death  rates  in,  31  ;  density 
of  population  in,  32  ;  neutralization  of, 
139;  powers  of  federal  government 
in,  184-185;  initiative  and  referen- 
dum in,  213-214;  canton  government 
in,  319 

Tariff,  as  a  political  issue,  300 ;  as  a 
source  of  revenue  in  the  United 
States,  399,  400 ;  development  of, 
405-406 ;  arguments  for  and  against, 
406-407 

Taxes,  as  a  requisite  for  suffrage,  209- 
210 ;  local,  343  ;  evolution  of,  397-398 

Term  of  office,  of  legislatures,  240-244  ; 
of  executives,  258-260 ;  of  civil  serv- 
ice, 268-269;  of  judiciary,  276 

Territories,  in  the  United  States,  368- 

369 

Territory,  essential  to  state,  10,  u  ;  in 
international  law,  148-150 

Teutons,  political  ability  of,  37  ;  pre- 
eminence of,  39;  political  ideas  of, 
60-6 1,  76;  legal  ideas  of,  124-126 

Thomas  Aquinas,  see  Aquinas 

Tories,  293-294 

Town  in  New  England,  327 

Town  meeting,  214,  327 

Township,  in  the  United  States,  316, 
327-329;  in  England,  325 

Trade,  government  regulation  of,  403- 
404 

Transportation,  26-27 ;  influence  on 
cities,  332 

Treaties,  as  a  source  of  international 
law,  137;  nature  of,  154;  effect  of 
war  on,  157 


INDEX 


421 


Tribe,  42-43 

Tribunal  of  Conflicts,  285 

Trusts,  government  regulation  of,  404 

Tudors,  62 

Tyrants,  56 

Ultimatum,  154 

Unconstitutional,  law  as,  120-121,  195, 
281-283 

Union,  forms  of,  179-181 

Unitary  government,  see  Government 

United  States,  the  influence  of  nature 
on,  19,  20,  21,  22,  24  ;  birth  and  death 
rates  in,  30 ;  density  of  population  in, 
32;  legal  sovereignty  in,  102;  civil 
liberty  in,  113-114;  form  of  govern- 
ment in,  175-176;  powers  of  federal 
government  in,  184  ;  upper  house  in, 
242  ;  lower  house  in,  244  ;  executive 
head  in,  258-261  ;  executive  council 
in,  263  ;  cabinet  in,  266 ;  judiciary  in, 
285-287 ;  political  parties  in,  294- 
296,  298-300,  306-312;  common- 
wealth government  in,  320-321  ;  local 
government  in,  327-329  ;  city  govern- 
ment in,  334-344 ;  colonial  govern- 
ment in,  350,  355,  366-371  ;  socialism 
in,  390 ;  finance  in,  399 

Unity,  essential  to  state,  12 

Upper  houses,  organization  of,  240-242  ; 
judicial  powers  of,  280-281 

Uti  possidetis,  160 

Utrecht,  Treaty  of,  137 

Vattel,  E.  de,  137 

Versailles,  Treaty  of,  138 

Veto,  251-252 

Vienna,  Congress  of,  153 

Voting,  development  of,  207  ;  restric- 
tions on,  208-211;  limited,  217; 
cumulative,  217 


War,  influence  of,  on  state -forming,  47, 
48;  in  international  law,  156-160; 
declaration  of,  157;  as  affected  by 
colonial  development,  348-349 ;  in 
early  states,  400 ;  in  modern  states, 
400-401 

Wars  of  the  Roses,  62 

Wergild,  275 

Westphalia,  Peace  of,  136,  137 

Whigs,  in  England,  293-294;  in  the 
United  States,  296 

William  III  of  England,  264 

William  the  Conqueror,  107 

Willoughby,  W.  F.,  on  colonial  policy 
of  the  United  States,  366 ;  on  status 
of  dependencies,  368 

Willoughby,  W.  W.,  on  divisions  of  po- 
litical science,  4  ;  on  political  science 
and  history,  4-5  ;  on  nature  of  sov< 
eignty,94,95;  on  popular  sovereignty, 
101 ;  on  location  of  sovereignty,  103; 
on  ordinances,  1 28 ;  on  classification  of 
states,  167  ;  on  the  StaatetLtaat,  180; 
on  constitutional  amendment,  201  ; 
on  the  activities  of  the  state,  380 ; 
on  individualism,  382,  384 ;  on  gov- 
ernmental functions,  394 

Wilson,  W.,  on  kinship  and  religion, 
45;  on  nature  of  sovereignty,  104; 
on  Roman  and  Teutonic  law,  124; 
on  Prussian  system  of  voting,  218; 
on  local  government  in  the  United 
States,  329 ;  on  essential  govern- 
mental functions,  396 

Woman  suffrage,  208-209 

Woodburn,  J.  A.,  on  political  morality, 

311 

World  empire,  Roman,  57-59,  75  ;  as  a 
type  of  state,  167 

Zollverein,)  198 


. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 


This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


19Apr'57BJ 


- 


MAR 


LD  21-100m-6,'56 
(B9311slO)476 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


o  1928 


YC19JL332 


UJttVERSIJY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


